Amit Baumel

Prof. Amit Baumel

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

12Years (2015-Present)

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

Representative Publications

View All Publications
25 September 2019 in Journal of Medical Internet Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
ABAmit Baumel
Amit Baumel
FMFrederick Muench
Frederick Muench
SEStav Edan
Stav Edan
JKJohn M Kane
John M Kane
Background: Understanding patterns of real-world usage of mental health apps is key to maximizing their potential to increase public self-management of care. Although developer-led studies have published results on the use of mental health apps in real-world settings, no study yet has systematically examined usage patterns of a large sample of mental health apps relying on independently collected data. Objective: Our aim is to present real-world objective data on user engagement with popular mental health apps. Methods: A systematic engine search was conducted using Google Play to identify Android apps with 10,000 installs or more targeting anxiety, depression, or emotional well-being. Coding of apps included primary incorporated techniques and mental health focus. Behavioral data on real-world usage were obtained from a panel that provides aggregated nonpersonal information on user engagement with mobile apps. Results: In total, 93 apps met the inclusion criteria (installs: median 100,000, IQR 90,000). The median percentage of daily active users (open rate) was 4.0% (IQR 4.7%) with a difference between trackers (median 6.3%, IQR 10.2%) and peer-support apps (median 17.0%) versus breathing exercise apps (median 1.6%, IQR 1.6%; all z≥3.42, all P<.001). Among active users, daily minutes of use were significantly higher for mindfulness/meditation (median 21.47, IQR 15.00) and peer support (median 35.08, n=2) apps than for apps incorporating other techniques (tracker, breathing exercise, psychoeducation: medians range 3.53-8.32; all z≥2.11, all P<.05). The medians of app 15-day and 30-day retention rates were 3.9% (IQR 10.3%) and 3.3% (IQR 6.2%), respectively. On day 30, peer support (median 8.9%, n=2), mindfulness/meditation (median 4.7%, IQR 6.2%), and tracker apps (median 6.1%, IQR 20.4%) had significantly higher retention rates than breathing exercise apps (median 0.0%, IQR 0.0%; all z≥2.18, all P≤.04). The pattern of daily use presented a descriptive peak toward the evening for apps incorporating most techniques (tracker, psychoeducation, and peer support) except mindfulness/meditation, which exhibited two peaks (morning and night). Conclusions: Although the number of app installs and daily active minutes of use may seem high, only a small portion of users actually used the apps for a long period of time. More studies using different datasets are needed to understand this phenomenon and the ways in which users self-manage their condition in real-world settings.

21 March 2017 in Journal of Medical Internet Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
ABAmit Baumel
Amit Baumel
KFKeren Faber
Keren Faber
NMNandita Mathur
Nandita Mathur
JKJohn M Kane
John M Kane
FMFred Muench
Fred Muench
Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet

26 May 2017 in Journal of Medical Internet Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
FMFrederick Muench
Frederick Muench
ABAmit Baumel
Amit Baumel
Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet

5 November 2019 in Translational Behavioral Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
ABAmit Baumel
Amit Baumel
SEStav Edan
Stav Edan
JKJohn M Kane
John M Kane
Trial settings that include proactive recruitment, human contact, and assessment procedures may substantially impact the way users engage with unguided e-mental health programs and the generalizability of reported findings. This study examined the impact of trial setting on user behavior by directly comparing reported user engagement in trial-based research and objective measures of real-world usage of the same unguided mental health programs. The authors conducted a systematic search for papers reporting user engagement with off-the-shelf unguided e-mental health programs. Real-world usage was obtained from a panel that presents aggregated nonpersonal information on user engagement with digital programs across the world. A total of 13 papers yielding 14 comparable usage metrics met all inclusion criteria. In three papers reporting the use of programs by lay users without any proactive trial procedures, the ratios calculated by dividing the usage reported in the paper by the usage documented within the objective dataset were 0.84, 1.05, and 1.27—suggesting a sufficient criterion validity for our examination. In studies that proactively recruited users and included pre- to post-assessment procedures (11 comparisons), the median program usage rate reported was 4.06 times higher (IQR = 4.49) than the real-world usage of the same program. Severity of clinical symptoms, in-person versus remote assessment procedures, study design, and program cost had no impact on these differences. The results suggest that trial settings have a large impact on user engagement with unguided interventions and, therefore, on the generalizability of the findings to the real world.

1 October 2016 in Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ABAmit Baumel
Amit Baumel
APAditya Pawar
Aditya Pawar
JKJohn M. Kane
John M. Kane
CCChristoph U. Correll
Christoph U. Correll
Objectives: Digital-based parent training (DPT) programs for parents of children with disruptive behaviors have been developed and tested in randomized trials. The aim of this study was to quantitatively assess the efficacy of these programs versus a control condition. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and random effects meta-analysis of peer-reviewed randomized studies comparing DPT targeting children with disruptive behaviors versus a control group (wait list or no treatment). Results: Altogether, seven studies (n = 718) were meta-analyzed. Compared to the control groups, DPT resulted in significantly greater improvement in child behavior (effect size [ES] = 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.21–0.66, studies = 7), parent behavior (ES = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.25–0.57, studies = 6), and parental confidence (ES = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.12–0.59, studies = 4). The improvement in child behavior was moderated by age group and severity of clinical presentation, which overlapped 100%. While DPT was superior to control conditions in studies of young children (mean age 11 years) with a nonclinical range of symptoms (ES = 0.21, 95% CI = −0.01 to 0.42, studies = 3). Analyses yielded similar results of higher ESs favoring studies of young children with clinical range disruptive behaviors for parent behavior and parental confidence, but the differences were not significant. Results further suggested that in studies of younger children, interactive programs (e.g., computerized programs) were more effective in improving child behavior compared to noninteractive programs (e.g., watching video clips) (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Although additional studies are needed, DPT holds promise as a potentially scalable evidence-based treatment of children with disruptive behaviors that can save human resources.

14 December 2018 in Journal of Medical Internet Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
ABAmit Baumel
Amit Baumel
JKJohn M Kane
John M Kane
Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet