Early Attrition Prediction for Web-Based Interpretation Bias Modification to Reduce Anxious Thinking: A Machine Learning Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Digital mental health is a promising paradigm for individualized, patient-driven health care. For example, cognitive bias modification programs that target interpretation biases (cognitive bias modification for interpretation [CBM-I]) can provide practice thinking about ambiguous situations in less threatening ways on the web without requiring a therapist. However, digital mental health interventions, including CBM-I, are often plagued with lack of sustained engagement and high attrition rates. New attrition detection and mitigation strategies are needed to improve these interventions. OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to identify participants at a high risk of dropout during the early stages of 3 web-based trials of multisession CBM-I and to investigate which self-reported and passively detected feature sets computed from the participants interacting with the intervention and assessments were most informative in making this prediction. METHODS: The participants analyzed in this paper were community adults with traits such as anxiety or negative thinking about the future (Study 1: n=252, Study 2: n=326, Study 3: n=699) who had been assigned to CBM-I conditions in 3 efficacy-effectiveness trials on our team's public research website. To identify participants at a high risk of dropout, we created 4 unique feature sets: self-reported baseline user characteristics (eg, demographics), self-reported user context and reactions to the program (eg, state affect), self-reported user clinical functioning (eg, mental health symptoms), and passively detected user behavior on the website (eg, time spent on a web page of CBM-I training exercises, time of day during which the exercises were completed, latency of completing the assessments, and type of device used). Then, we investigated the feature sets as potential predictors of which participants were at high risk of not starting the second training session of a given program using well-known machine learning algorithms. RESULTS: -scores of .832 (Study 1 with 146 features), .770 (Study 2 with 87 features), and .917 (Study 3 with 127 features). Features involving passive detection of user behavior contributed the most to the prediction relative to other features. The mean Gini importance scores for the passive features were as follows: .033 (95% CI .019-.047) in Study 1; .029 (95% CI .023-.035) in Study 2; and .045 (95% CI .039-.051) in Study 3. However, using all features extracted from a given study led to the best predictive performance. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that using passive indicators of user behavior, alongside self-reported measures, can improve the accuracy of prediction of participants at a high risk of dropout early during multisession CBM-I programs. Furthermore, our analyses highlight the challenge of generalizability in digital health intervention studies and the need for more personalized attrition prevention strategies.
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 | 0,029 | 0,085 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 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 ».