Understanding the use of mobile technology by people with depression.

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Exploring the views and experiences of using mobile information and communication technology (mobile phones, laptop or tablet computers) by people with depression: A qualitative study.

  • IRAS ID

    167516

  • Contact name

    Steve MacGillivray

  • Contact email

    s.a.macgillivray@dundee.ac.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    Tayside Health Board

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    1 years, 0 months, 0 days

  • Research summary

    A systematic review of qualitative research mapped and categorised all qualitative papers in the domain of health and mobile technology research and clearly identified a gap in the research literature regarding mobile information and communication technology (mICTs) and people with depression. Further research is therefore required to understand the meaning this type of technology holds for people with depression.

    The aims of the study are to explore the views and experiences of using mICTs by patients with depression and understand the meaning, use and role mobile technology has for mental health care professionals’ in the management of patients with depression. A qualitative study using in-depth, semi-structured interviews with patients and health professionals lasting approximately 12 months. Participants’ data sets will be analysed using an adapted Grounded Theory approach (Strauss and Corbin, 2008, Willig, 2013). Grounded theory involves the gradual identification and integration of categories of meaning from the data, and the identification of relationships between them (Willig, 2013, Spencer et al., 2014).

    Understanding how mobile technology is used by patients with depression and its role in the management of the long-term condition could aid technological design and support clinical practice.

  • REC name

    East of Scotland Research Ethics Service REC 1

  • REC reference

    15/ES/0022

  • Date of REC Opinion

    12 Mar 2015

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion