Toward Tailoring Just-in-Time Adaptive Intervention Systems for Workplace Stress Reduction: Exploratory Analysis of Intervention Implementation
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Integrating stress-reduction interventions into the workplace may improve the health and well-being of employees, and there is an opportunity to leverage ubiquitous everyday work technologies to understand dynamic work contexts and facilitate stress reduction wherever work happens. Sensing-powered just-in-time adaptive intervention (JITAI) systems have the potential to adapt and deliver tailored interventions, but such adaptation requires a comprehensive analysis of contextual and individual-level variables that may influence intervention outcomes and be leveraged to drive the system's decision-making. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify key tailoring variables that influence momentary engagement in digital stress reduction microinterventions to inform the design of similar JITAI systems. METHODS: To inform the design of such dynamic adaptation, we analyzed data from the implementation and deployment of a system that incorporates passively sensed data across everyday work devices to send just-in-time stress reduction microinterventions in the workplace to 43 participants during a 4-week deployment. We evaluated 27 trait-based factors (ie, individual characteristics), state-based factors (ie, workplace contextual and behavioral signals and momentary stress), and intervention-related factors (ie, location and function) across 1585 system-initiated interventions. We built logistical regression models to identify the factors contributing to momentary engagement, the choice of interventions, the engagement given an intervention choice, the user rating of interventions engaged, and the stress reduction from the engagement. RESULTS: We found that women (odds ratio [OR] 0.41, 95% CI 0.21-0.77; P=.03), those with higher neuroticism (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39-0.81; P=.01), those with higher cognitive reappraisal skills (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.52-0.91; P=.04), and those that chose calm interventions (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23-0.78; P=.03) were significantly less likely to experience stress reduction, while those with higher agreeableness (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.10-2.76; P=.06) and those that chose prompt-based (OR 6.65, 95% CI 1.53-36.45; P=.06) or video-based (OR 5.62, 95% CI 1.12-34.10; P=.12) interventions were substantially more likely to experience stress reduction. We also found that work-related contextual signals such as higher meeting counts (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.49-0.78; P<.001) and higher engagement skewness (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.51-0.79; P<.001) were associated with a lower likelihood of engagement, indicating that state-based contextual factors such as being in a meeting or the time of the day may matter more for engagement than efficacy. In addition, a just-in-time intervention that was explicitly rescheduled to a later time was more likely to be engaged with (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.32-2.38; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: JITAI systems have the potential to integrate timely support into the workplace. On the basis of our findings, we recommend that individual, contextual, and content-based factors be incorporated into the system for tailoring as well as for monitoring ineffective engagements across subgroups and contexts.
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 | 0,027 | 0,094 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 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 ».