Currently submitted to: JMIR Human Factors
Date Submitted: Nov 6, 2025
Open Peer Review Period: Nov 21, 2025 - Jan 16, 2026
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint
Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).
Peer review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.
Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).
Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.
Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.
Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Evaluation of Healthcare Professionals’ Perspectives on the Quality of the SAFE App Targeted at People Who Self-Harm: A Questionnaire Survey Study
ABSTRACT
Background:
Digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) can be effective in supporting patients experiencing mental health distress and can offer alternative and novel therapeutic tools for healthcare professionals. However, the evidence base and the quality of available DMHIs in the commercial marketplace remain questionable. In particular, DMHIs targeting individuals who self-harm are scant. To address this need, the SAFE app was designed and developed for individuals at risk of self-harm and for their healthcare providers.
Objective:
The study aimed to evaluate the quality of SAFE from the perspective of healthcare professionals.
Methods:
The study employed an open survey design to evaluate healthcare professionals’ acceptance of the SAFE app. Healthcare professionals were recruited from a range of psychiatric and educational settings. The Mobile Application Rating Scale: User Version (uMARS) was used to assess the quality of the app. The scale assesses four objective domains of quality: (A) engagement, (B) functionality, (C) aesthetics, and (D) information quality. Each domain is rated on a 5-point Likert scale with ratings below 3 poor, 3-3.5 adequate, 3.5-4 good, and 4+ very good. Data was collected online via the SurveyXact platform. A descriptive analysis was conducted to summarise the participants’ evaluations of SAFE.
Results:
A total of 121 healthcare professionals participated in the study: 66.9% (81/121) completed the uMARS; 24% (29/121) partially completed it; and 9% (11/121) did not respond. Overall, the quality of SAFE was rated as very good, with a total uMARS mean score of 4.08 (SD 0.68). Functionality, aesthetics, and information quality were evaluated as very good (mean >4). Engagement scored lowest with a mean score of 3.82 (SD 0.85) but was still perceived as good.
Conclusions:
This study systematically evaluated different aspects of the quality of the SAFE app from the perspective of healthcare professionals. The SAFE app was rated highly across a range of domains using a validated measure (uMARS), indicating good quality and usability. High usability can facilitate utilisation of the app in clinical practice by mental health staff and people at risk of or engaging in self-harm, although further systematic assessment of the app is required to determine its efficacy regarding reducing distress and engaging in self-harm.
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.