Abstract
Online mental health communities enable people to seek and provide support, and growing evidence shows the efficacy of community participation to cope with mental health distress. However, what factors of peer support lead to favorable psychosocial outcomes for individuals is less clear. Using a dataset of over 300K posts by ∼39K individuals on an online community TalkLife, we present a study to investigate the effect of several factors, such as adaptability, diversity, immediacy, and the nature of support. Unlike typical causal studies that focus on the effect of each treatment, we focus on the outcome and address the reverse causal question of identifying treatments that may have led to the outcome, drawing on case-control studies in epidemiology. Specifically, we define the outcome as an aggregate of affective, behavioral, and cognitive psychosocial change and identify Case (most improved) and Control (least improved) cohorts of individuals. Considering responses from peers as treatments, we evaluate the differences in the responses received by Case and Control, per matched clusters of similar individuals. We find that effective support includes complex language factors such as diversity, adaptability, and style, but simple indicators such as quantity and immediacy are not causally relevant. Our work bears methodological and design implications for online mental health platforms, and has the potential to guide suggestive interventions for peer supporters on these platforms.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
NA
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This paper uses sourced data (licensed and consented) from TalkLife. Our work is in collaboration with TalkLife, and given the sensitivity of our work, we are committed to securing the privacy of the individuals. The dataset was accessed through secured databases with necessary privacy and ethical protocols in place, and the dataset was de-identified and no personally identifiable information was used. This paper only reports aggregated measures to prevent traceability and identifiability of individuals on the platform. Even accounting for the benefits, we recognize the potential misuses, risks, and ethical consequences involved with this kind of research, which we elaborate in Discussion. This work is approved by the Institutional Review Board at Microsoft Research.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
amshar{at}microsoft.com
Data Availability
This paper uses sourced data (licensed and consented) from TalkLife. The raw data will not be publicly shared for privacy and ethical reasons given the sensitivity of the work.
