JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Traditional mental health interventions often fail to produce lasting behavioral change due to reliance on self-reporting and subjective awareness. Break Method is a structured, process-driven approach that rewires subconscious emotional patterns using brain pattern mapping and behavioral strategies. This study evaluated its effectiveness in improving self-reported mental health symptoms and examined which symptoms were most associated with program efficacy. It also explored whether participant motivations influenced outcomes.

Objective:

This exploratory study seeks to generate foundational insights into the program’s effectiveness and to identify patterns in participant outcomes. The principal aim was to assess how the program's benefits varied based on participants' reasons for joining. By examining patterns in participants' motivations and mental health outcomes, this study offers valuable insights into the specific populations that respond most effectively to Break Method. These findings aim to guide program managers and decision-makers in optimizing intervention strategies and tailoring approaches to maximize impact across diverse groups. The primary questions are: (a) what is the overall efficacy of the program for improving mental health symptoms, and (b) which symptom is the most associated factor with program efficacy?

Methods:

A total of 175 participants who completed Break Method between Fall 2018 and Spring 2022 were included in the analysis. Self-reported mental health status was assessed before and after the program using a 5-point Likert scale. Statistical tests, including paired t-tests and McNemar tests, measured symptom improvements, while analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) adjusted for baseline differences. Multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) identified participant clusters, and a generalized estimating equation (GEE) model assessed their associations with mental health improvements.

Results:

Results showed significant improvements, with mean Likert scores increasing from 2.07 to 3.92. The greatest improvements were observed in participants reporting self-harm/suicidal ideation (β = 0.511, 95% CI: 0.091, 0.931), OCD-related symptoms (β = 0.455, 95% CI: 0.061, 0.850), and anxiety (β = 0.332, 95% CI: 0.073, 0.591). MCA revealed three participant clusters: those struggling with self-image (e.g., depression, low confidence, self-sabotage), those focused on career and personal growth, and those with OCD-related concerns. The self-image cluster exhibited the most significant symptom reductions (β = 0.348, 95% CI: 0.060, 0.636).

Conclusions:

These findings suggest that Break Method effectively improves mental health, particularly for individuals experiencing anxiety, low confidence, and self-sabotage. Identifying participant clusters highlights the importance of tailoring interventions to maximize impact. While results are promising, further research using standardized clinical measures and longitudinal follow-ups is needed to confirm long-term efficacy and broader applicability.