Alicia Anne Dahl

Dr. Alicia Anne Dahl

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

6Years (2021-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 February 2018 in International Journal of Information Management
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
AKAmir Karami
Amir Karami
ADAlicia Anne Dahl
Alicia Anne Dahl
GTGabrielle Turner-McGrievy
Gabrielle Turner-McGrievy
HKHadi Kharrazi
Hadi Kharrazi
GJGeorge Shaw, Jr.
George Shaw, Jr.

1 March 2018 in Contemporary Clinical Trials
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SWSara Wilcox
Sara Wilcox
Jihong LiuJihong Liu
Jihong Liu
CACheryl L. Addy
Cheryl L. Addy
GTGabrielle Turner-McGrievy
Gabrielle Turner-McGrievy
JBJudith T. Burgis
Judith T. Burgis
ABAlycia K. Boutté
Alycia K. Boutté

1 October 2016 in Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MPMia A. Papas
Mia A. Papas
JTJillian C. Trabulsi
Jillian C. Trabulsi
ADAlicia Anne Dahl
Alicia Anne Dahl
GDGregory Dominick
Gregory Dominick

24 December 2021 in JMIR Mental Health
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
DZDongsong Zhang
Dongsong Zhang
JLJaewan Lim
Jaewan Lim
LZLina Zhou
Lina Zhou
ADAlicia Anne Dahl
Alicia Anne Dahl
Background: Mobile mental health systems (MMHS) have been increasingly developed and deployed in support of monitoring, management, and intervention with regard to patients with mental disorders. However, many of these systems rely on patient data collected by smartphones or other wearable devices to infer patients’ mental status, which raises privacy concerns. Such a value-privacy paradox poses significant challenges to patients’ adoption and use of MMHS; yet, there has been limited understanding of it. Objective: To address the significant literature gap, this research aims to investigate both the antecedents of patients’ privacy concerns and the effects of privacy concerns on their continuous usage intention with regard to MMHS. Methods: Using a web-based survey, this research collected data from 170 participants with MMHS experience recruited from online mental health communities and a university community. The data analyses used both repeated analysis of variance and partial least squares regression. Results: The results showed that data type (P=.003), data stage (P<.001), privacy victimization experience (P=.01), and privacy awareness (P=.08) have positive effects on privacy concerns. Specifically, users report higher privacy concerns for social interaction data (P=.007) and self-reported data (P=.001) than for biometrics data; privacy concerns are higher for data transmission (P=.01) and data sharing (P<.001) than for data collection. Our results also reveal that privacy concerns have an effect on attitude toward privacy protection (P=.001), which in turn affects continuous usage intention with regard to MMHS. Conclusions: This study contributes to the literature by deepening our understanding of the data value-privacy paradox in MMHS research. The findings offer practical guidelines for breaking the paradox through the design of user-centered and privacy-preserving MMHS.

1 June 2016 in Current Opinion in Psychology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ADAlicia Anne Dahl
Alicia Anne Dahl
SHSarah B Hales
Sarah B Hales
GTGabrielle Turner-McGrievy
Gabrielle Turner-McGrievy

9 May 2024 in Nutrients
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ADAlicia Anne Dahl
Alicia Anne Dahl
SFStacy M. Fandetti
Stacy M. Fandetti
Lilian Ouja AdemuLilian Ouja Ademu
Lilian Ouja Ademu
RHRyan Harris
Ryan Harris
Elizabeth F RacineElizabeth F Racine
Elizabeth F Racine
The availability, promotion, and price of healthy foods within the university food environment may impact students’ dietary choices. This systematic review summarizes the tools and methods used to assess the healthfulness of university food environments where many students spend a significant portion of their emerging adulthood. Thirty-six global studies published between 2012 and 2022 were sourced from PubMed (NNLM), Cochrane Library (Wiley), Web of Science (Clarivate), APA PsycInfo (EBSCO), CINHAL Complete (EBSCO), ProQuest Nursing, and Allied Health, following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Of the included studies, 58% were institutional-level audits, 17% examined individual-level perceptions, and 25% combined both. Most institutional-level audits focused on one aspect of the food environment (e.g., eateries, vending machines). For studies examining multiple spaces within the campus environment (38%), comprehensive assessments were limited, and most studies had to employ a combination of assessment tools. Surveys were most often used to gather individual perceptions about the food environment. The Nutrition Environment Measures Survey (NEMS) was the most commonly used tool across all studies. This review highlights the need for a standardized tool, method, or a “healthy” benchmark for specific use at universities to improve methodological rigor and comparability of findings across institutions.