A Robot-Delivered Training Program to Improve Children’s Mental Health and Resilience in Dutch Primary Schools: Pilot Intervention Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Mental health problems often start at an early age and can persist into adulthood, leading to physical and mental health problems such as substance abuse, sleep problems, depressive disorders, and suicidal tendencies. Therefore, it is important to invest in the mental health of young people through, for example, initiatives focused on mental health promotion and prevention. The ePartners robot buddy offers children training modules focused on enhancing resilience and mental health, specifically targeting self-image and social skills and/or addressing unhelpful feelings and thinking patterns in children's daily life situations. Objective: The study primarily aims to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and usability of the intervention according to the children and their teachers and secondarily aims to evaluate its potential effects on the mental well-being (general mental well-being, quality of life [QoL], and self-efficacy) of children. Methods: A single-arm, 6-week, pre-post pilot intervention study involving children and their teachers was conducted in 3 primary schools in the Netherlands. Outcomes were assessed using questionnaires. Primary outcomes were assessed postintervention and included feasibility and acceptability for teachers and acceptability and usability for children. Secondary outcomes included self-reported general mental well-being and self-efficacy and teacher-reported general mental well-being and were assessed at baseline and postintervention. Results: Data showed that the intervention was generally perceived as moderately feasible according to the Feasibility of Intervention Measure (mean 17.3, SD 2.6; on a scale from 4 to 20) and showed relatively high acceptability (mean 16.9, SD 3.8; on a scale from 4 to 20) according to teachers (n=7). Additional feasibility questions showed that teachers found it generally feasible to guide children who had few questions about using the robot. Feasibility was moderate due to limited time for integration, many content-related questions from children, and the substantial learning needed to select themes. Children (n=73) reported high perceived usability of the intervention (mean 15.2, SD 2.4; on a scale from 4 to 20). The perceived acceptability of the intervention by children was also relatively high, with a mean of 12.0 (SD 2.3) on a scale from 3 to 15. Teacher-reported QoL of children improved significantly from baseline (mean 36.0, SD 4.6) to postintervention (mean 37.2, SD 3.8; t64=2.77; P=.01); however, the children's self-reported QoL did not significantly change over time. No significant changes in general mental well-being and self-efficacy scores were found. Conclusions: This study provides valuable insights into the feasibility, acceptability, and usability of a robot-delivered mental health-promoting intervention within a primary school setting. Further research is needed to fully understand its potential benefits and address existing limitations associated with the implementation of such interventions in the school setting.
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 | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 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 ».