Youth perspectives on mobile health adherence interventions: A qualitative study guided by the supportive accountability model

We applied a Supportive Accountability Model lens to understand how youth view remote human coaching versus automated reminders targeting medication adherence. We used thematic analysis to interpret (N = 22) youths’ responses to semi-structured interviews after 12 weeks of mobile health intervention. Participants reported that both coaching and automated reminders prompted them to take medication, improving their adherence. Participants found coaching helpful because they developed routines and strategies, were motivated to avoid disappointing their coach, and felt their coach cared for them. Automated support could be motivational for some but demanded less engagement. Participants described phone calls as disruptive to their daily lives, but conducive to developing a personal connection with their coach, whereas texts were easier and more flexible. Youth emphasized that individual preferences often differ. Human coaching was viewed as a more potent, engaging adherence intervention than automated reminders, although individual needs and preferences differed. Phone calls may enhance the experience of supportive accountability for adherence, but also pose greater acceptability and usability barriers than texting. Intervention developers should provide opportunities for youth to make personal connections with human adherence supporters and attend to youth preferences for communication modality. •Youth find human coaching helpful for promoting medication adherence.•Youth are motivated to avoid disappointing their adherence coaches.•Coaching via phone calls versus texts was more disruptive, but more engaging.•Individual preferences vary substantially regarding types of mHealth interventions.