You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
'You have to put a lot of trust in me': autonomy, trust, and trustworthiness in the context of mobile apps for mental health
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, March 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11019-023-10146-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Regina Müller, Nadia Primc, Eva Kuhn |
| Abstract |
Trust and trustworthiness are essential for good healthcare, especially in mental healthcare. New technologies, such as mobile health apps, can affect trust relationships. In mental health, some apps need the trust of their users for therapeutic efficacy and explicitly ask for it, for example, through an avatar. Suppose an artificial character in an app delivers healthcare. In that case, the following questions arise: Whom does the user direct their trust to? Whether and when can an avatar be considered trustworthy? Our study aims to analyze different dimensions of trustworthiness in the context of mobile health app use. We integrate O'Neill's account of autonomy, trust, and trustworthiness into a model of trustworthiness as a relational concept with four relata: B is trustworthy with respect to A regarding the performance of Z because of C. Together with O'Neill's criteria of trustworthiness (honesty, competence, and reliability), this four-sided model is used to analyze different dimensions of trustworthiness in an exemplary case of mobile health app use. Our example focuses on an app that uses an avatar and is intended to treat sleep difficulties. The conceptual analysis shows that interpreting trust and trustworthiness in health app use is multi-layered and involves a net of interwoven universal obligations. At the same time, O'Neill's approach to autonomy, trust, and trustworthiness offers a normative account to structure and analyze these complex relations of trust and trustworthiness using mobile health apps. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | 29% |
| Poland | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 57% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 16 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 13% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 10 | 63% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 2 | 13% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 12 | 75% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 April 2023.
All research outputs
#7,086,459
of 25,487,317 outputs
Outputs from Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
#185
of 623 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,506
of 422,586 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
#5
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,487,317 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 623 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 422,586 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.