Increasing Access to Mental Health Care With Breathe, an Internet-Based Program for Anxious Adolescents: Study Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a demand to make first-line treatments, including cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for adolescent anxiety disorders, more widely available. Internet-based CBT is proposed to circumvent access and availability barriers and reduce health care system costs. Recent reviews suggest more evidence is needed to establish the treatment effects of Internet-based CBT in children and adolescents and to determine related economic impacts. OBJECTIVE: This pilot trial aims to collect the necessary data to inform the planning of a full-scale RCT to test the effectiveness of the Internet-based CBT program Breathe (Being Real, Easing Anxiety: Tools Helping Electronically). METHODS: We are conducting a 27-month, 2-arm parallel-group, pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT). Outcomes will inform the planning of a full-scale RCT aimed to test the effectiveness of Internet-based CBT with a population of adolescents with moderate to mild anxiety problems. In the pilot RCT we will: (1) define a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the primary outcome measure (total anxiety score using the Multidimensional Anxiety Scale for Children); (2) determine a sample size for the full-scale RCT; (3) estimate recruitment and retention rates; (4) measure intervention acceptability to inform critical intervention changes; (5) determine the use of co-interventions; and (6) conduct a cost-consequence analysis to inform a cost-effectiveness analysis in the full-scale RCT. Adolescents aged 13-17 years seeking care for an anxiety complaint from a participating emergency department, mobile or school-based crisis team, or primary care clinic are being screened for interest and eligibility. Enrolled adolescents are being randomly allocated to either 8 weeks of Internet-based CBT with limited telephone and e-mail support, or a control group with access to a static webpage listing anxiety resources. Adolescents are randomly assigned using a computer generated allocation sequence. Data are being collected at baseline, treatment completion, and at a 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: Currently, adolescents are being enrolled in the study. Enrolment is taking place between March 2014 and February 2016; data collection will conclude May 2016. We expect that analysis and results will be available by August 2016. CONCLUSIONS: In many communities, the resources available for front-line anxiety treatment are outweighed by the need for care. This pilot RCT is an essential step to designing a robust RCT to evaluate the effectiveness of an Internet-based CBT program for adolescents with moderate to mild anxiety problems. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02059226; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02059226 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6epF8v7k4).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.046 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.095 | 0.017 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".