Testing the Feasibility, Acceptability, and Potential Efficacy of an Innovative Digital Mental Health Care Delivery Model Designed to Increase Access to Care: Open Trial of the Digital Clinic
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background Mental health concerns have become increasingly prevalent; however, care remains inaccessible to many. While digital mental health interventions offer a promising solution, self-help and even coached apps have not fully addressed the challenge. There is now a growing interest in hybrid, or blended, care approaches that use apps as tools to augment, rather than to entirely guide, care. The Digital Clinic is one such model, designed to increase access to high-quality mental health services. Objective To assess the feasibility, acceptability, and potential efficacy of the Digital Clinic model, this study aims to conduct a nonrandomized open trial with participants experiencing depression, anxiety, or both, at various levels of clinical severity. Methods Clinicians were trained in conducting brief transdiagnostic evidence-based treatment augmented by a mental health app (mindLAMP); digital navigators were trained in supporting participants’ app engagement and digital literacy while also sharing app data with both patients and clinicians. Feasibility and acceptability of this 8-week program were assessed against a range of benchmarks. Potential efficacy was assessed by calculating pre-post change in symptoms of depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9; PHQ-9), anxiety (7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder; GAD-7), and comorbid depression and anxiety (Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale; PHQ-ADS), as well as rates of clinically meaningful improvement and remission. Secondary outcomes included change in functional impairment, self-efficacy in managing emotions, and flourishing. Results Of the 258 enrolled participants, 215 (83.3%) completed the 8-week program. Most were White (n=151, 70.2%) and identified as cisgender women (n=136, 63.3%), with a mean age of 41 (SD 14) years. Feasibility and acceptability were good to excellent across a range of domains. The program demonstrated potential efficacy: the average PHQ-9 score was moderate to moderately severe at baseline (mean 13.39, SD 4.53) and decreased to subclinical (mean 7.79, SD 4.61) by the end of the intervention (t126=12.50, P<.001, Cohen d=1.11). Similarly, the average GAD-7 score decreased from moderate at baseline (mean 12.93, SD 3.67) to subclinical (mean 7.35, SD 4.19) by the end of the intervention (t113=13, P<.001, Cohen d=1.22). Participation in the program was also associated with high rates of clinically significant improvement and remission. Conclusions Results suggest that the Digital Clinic model is feasible, acceptable, and potentially efficacious, warranting a future randomized controlled trial to establish the efficacy of this innovative model of care.
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 | 0,019 | 0,027 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,012 | 0,002 |
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 ».