Adaptation of ACTivate Your Wellbeing, a Digital Health and Well-being Program for Young Persons: Co-design Approach
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: ACTivate your wellbeing is a digital health and well-being program designed to support and encourage positive lifestyle behavior change. The website includes 5 lifestyle behavior change modules and a 12-week well-being intervention based on acceptance and commitment therapy. It was timely to adapt the resource for a new audience in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Young persons' mental health needs have increased substantially, and lifestyle behaviors play a critical role in both mental and physical health statuses. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to adapt an existing health and well-being website for use by young persons aged 16 to 24 years. METHODS: A 3-staged participatory, co-design approach was adopted. The participants reviewed the existing program and provided feedback (stage 1) before cocreating new content (stage 2). Finally, the updated program underwent formative evaluation (stage 3). Two groups were created: one had access for 3 weeks and the other could self-select their study duration. The options were 3 weeks, 60 days, or 90 days. Outcome measures were the Warwick and Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale, 4-item Patient Health Questionnaire, and Acceptance and Action Questionnaire version 2. RESULTS: Stage 1 identified that the website was appealing to the new audience (19/24, 79%), and the 3 web-based focus group discussions explored data from the written review in more depth to identify and clarify the main areas for update and adaptation. Overall, 3 themes were developed, and the data informed the creation of 6 tasks for use in 5 web-based co-design workshops. Stage 2 led to the cocreation of 36 outputs, including a new name, new content, scenarios, images, and a new user dashboard, which included streaks and an updated color scheme. After the website update program was completed, 40 participants registered to use the website for formative evaluation (stage 3). Data analysis revealed differences in engagement, completion, and mean well-being after intervention between the 2 groups. The completion rate was 68% in the 3-week duration group, and well-being scores improved after intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Young persons engaged actively with the participatory design process. The participants discussed the updates they desired during the web-based discussions, which worked well via Zoom (Zoom Video Communications Inc) when small groups were used. The participants easily cocreated new content during the web-based co-design workshops. The web-based format enabled a range of participants to take part, share their ideas, search for images, and design digital content creatively together. The Zoom software enabled screen sharing and collaborative whiteboard use, which helped the cocreation process. The formative evaluation suggested that younger users who engage more with the website for a shorter duration may benefit more.
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 | 0,021 | 0,019 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| 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 ».