Acceptability and Feasibility of “Village,” a Digital Communication App for Young People Experiencing Low Mood, Thoughts of Self-harm, and Suicidal Ideation to Obtain Support From Family and Friends: Mixed Methods Pilot Open Trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Young people experiencing low mood, thoughts related to self-harm, and suicidal ideation often struggle to communicate their emotions and receive timely support from family and friends. Technologically delivered support interventions may be useful in addressing this need. OBJECTIVE: This paper aimed to evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of "Village," a communication app co-designed with young people and their family and friends from New Zealand. METHODS: A mixed methods pilot open trial design was adopted. Participants were primarily recruited via social media advertisements and clinicians in specialist mental health services over an 8-month period. The primary outcomes were acceptability of the app (via thematically analyzed qualitative feedback and retention rates) and feasibility of conducting a larger randomized controlled trial gauged via effectiveness of recruitment methods, completion of chosen outcome measures, and occurrence of unanticipated operational issues. Secondary outcomes were app usability, safety, and changes in symptoms of depression (via the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 modified for adolescents), suicidal ideation (on the Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire), and functioning (using the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 or Child and Youth version). RESULTS: A total of 26 young people ("users") were enrolled in the trial, of which 21 recruited friends and family members ("buddies") and completed quantitative outcome measures at baseline, 4 weeks, and 3 months. Furthermore, 13 users and 12 buddies also provided qualitative feedback about the app, identifying the key themes of appeal of app features and layout, usefulness of its content, and technological challenges (primarily with onboarding and notifications). Users gave Village a mean rating of 3.8 (range 2.7-4.6) out of 5 on a 5-point scale for app quality and an overall star rating of 3.4 out of 5 for subjective quality. Within this limited sample, users reported a clinically significant reduction in depressive symptoms (P=.007), but nonsignificant changes in suicidal ideation and functioning. The embedded risk detection software was activated on 3 occasions, and no additional support was required for users. CONCLUSIONS: During this open trial, Village was found to be acceptable, usable, and safe. The feasibility of a larger randomized controlled trial was also confirmed after some modifications to the recruitment strategy and app. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Network Registry ACTRN12620000241932p; https://tinyurl.com/ya6t4fx2.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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 tête enseignante, 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 ».