Characterizing Digital Mindfulness Intervention Utilization and Weekly Assessments: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Caregivers of Persons Living with Dementia (Preprint)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
<sec> <title>BACKGROUND</title> Caregivers of persons living with dementia (PLWD) are at increased risk of reporting high stress. Mindfulness based interventions (MBIs) teach caregivers mindfulness skill and are effective at reducing stress. Digital MBIs are a feasible way to improve access to MBIs for caregivers of PWLD. Yet, caregiver improvement with digital MBI utilization is less defined in the literature. </sec> <sec> <title>OBJECTIVE</title> The goal of this secondary data analysis was to characterize weekly mindfulness and stress ratings among caregivers of PLWD and how digital MBI utilization impacted ratings throughout 12 weeks of a feasibility trial. </sec> <sec> <title>METHODS</title> Participants were eligible for this secondary analysis if they were randomized to the digital MBI condition (Healthy Mind Program for Caregivers [HMP-C], n=46) and completed weekly ratings over the 12-week trial. At baseline and at the end of each week of the trial, participants rated their mindfulness and stress in the past week from 0-10. Weekly HMP-C utilization was defined as time spent using HMP-C in the week prior to weekly ratings. Descriptive statistics and visualizations were used to characterize mindfulness and stress ratings. Generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) were used to estimate the effect of mindfulness on stress and the effect of HMP-C utilization on stress and mindfulness throughout the trial (alpha=0.05). </sec> <sec> <title>RESULTS</title> Baseline mindfulness and stress ratings were 4 (IQR=3, range=0-8) and 7 (IQR=1.5, range=4-10), respectively. Stress evidenced the greatest decrease between baseline and week 3 (-2 points on average), whereas mindfulness had the greatest increase between baseline and week 4 (+2.5 points on average). There was a significant fixed effect of baseline mindfulness on baseline stress (β=0.5, p<0.001), with a significant interaction between mindfulness and study week (β=0.05, p=0.001), suggesting that this relationship was attenuated over time. There was variability in baseline stress (τ00=2.04) and the relationship between mindfulness and stress (τ₁₁=0.08), with a high correlation (ρ01=0.86), suggesting that those with high baseline stress benefited most from increases in mindfulness. For every 10 minutes of HMP-C utilization between baseline and week 1, mindfulness and stress ratings were 0.14 points higher (p<.001) and 0.14 points lower (p<.001), respectively. Despite a significant interaction between HMP-C utilization and study week in both models, the effect size was small (mindfulness:β=0.02, p<0.001; stress:β=0.01, p=0.013), suggesting that this relationship was sustained over time. </sec> <sec> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> Mindfulness and stress improved mostly during the first 3-4 weeks of the trial. During this time of mindfulness skill acquisition, mindfulness and stress were the most significantly negatively related, especially among those with high baseline stress. The consistent relationship between HMP-C utilization and mindfulness and stress suggests that continued use of HMP-C may be helpful for skill maintenance. </sec> <sec> <title>CLINICALTRIAL</title> ClinicalTrials.gov [NCT05732038] https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05732038?cond=%22Dementia%22&intr=%22Folate%22&viewType=Table&rank=4 </sec>
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».