Digital Prompts to Increase Engagement With the Headspace App and for Stress Regulation Among Parents: Feasibility Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Given the interrelated health of children and parents, strategies to promote stress regulation are critically important in the family context. However, the uptake of preventive mental health is limited among parents owing to competing family demands. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aim to determine whether it is feasible and acceptable to randomize digital prompts designed to engage parents in real-time brief mindfulness activities guided by a commercially available app. METHODS: We conducted a 30-day pilot microrandomized trial among a sample of parents who used Android smartphones. Each day during a parent-specified time frame, participants had a 50% probability of receiving a prompt with a message encouraging them to engage in a mindfulness activity using a commercial app, Headspace. In the 24 hours following randomization, ecological momentary assessments and passively collected smartphone data were used to assess proximal engagement (yes or no) with the app and any mindfulness activity (with or without the app). These data were combined with baseline and exit surveys to determine feasibility and acceptability. RESULTS: Over 4 months, 83 interested parents were screened, 48 were eligible, 16 were enrolled, and 10 were successfully onboarded. Reasons for nonparticipation included technology barriers, privacy concerns, time constraints, or change of mind. In total, 80% (8/10) of parents who onboarded successfully completed all aspects of the intervention. While it is feasible to randomize prompt delivery, only 60% (6/10) of parents reported that the timing of prompts was helpful despite having control over the delivery window. Across the study period, we observed higher self-reported engagement with Headspace on days with prompts (31/62, 50% of days), as opposed to days without prompts (33/103, 32% of days). This pattern was consistent for most participants in this study (7/8, 87%). The time spent using the app on days with prompts (mean 566, SD 378 seconds) was descriptively higher than on days without prompts (mean 225, SD 276 seconds). App usage was highest during the first week and declined over each of the remaining 3 weeks. However, self-reported engagement in mindfulness activities without the app increased over time. Self-reported engagement with any mindfulness activity was similar on days with (40/62, 65% of days) and without (65/103, 63% of days) prompts. Participants found the Headspace app helpful (10/10, 100%) and would recommend the program to others (9/10, 90%). CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary findings suggest that parents are receptive to using mindfulness apps to support stress management, and prompts are likely to increase engagement with the app. However, we identified several implementation challenges in the current trial, specifically a need to optimize prompt timing and frequency as a strategy to engage users in preventive digital mental health.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,010 | 0,016 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».