Indigenous Adolescents’ Perception of an eMental Health Program (SPARX): Exploratory Qualitative Assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Depression is a major health issue for indigenous adolescents, yet there is little research conducted about the efficacy and development of psychological interventions for these populations. In New Zealand there is little known about taitamariki (Māori adolescent) opinions regarding the development and effectiveness of psychological interventions, let alone computerized cognitive behavioral therapy. SPARX (Smart, Positive, Active, Realistic, X-factor thoughts) is a computerized intervention developed in New Zealand to treat mild-to-moderate depression in young people. Users are engaged in a virtual 3D environment where they must complete missions to progress to the next level. In each level there are challenges and puzzles to completeIt was designed to appeal to all young people in New Zealand and incorporates several images and concepts that are specifically Māori. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to conduct an exploratory qualitative study of Māori adolescents' opinions about the SPARX program. This is a follow-up to an earlier study where taitamariki opinions were gathered to inform the design of a computerized cognitive behavior therapy program. METHODS: Taitamariki were interviewed using a semistructured interview once they had completed work with the SPARX resource. Six participants agreed to complete the interview; the interviews ranged from 10 to 30 minutes. RESULTS: Taitamariki participating in the interviews found SPARX to be helpful. The Māori designs from the SPARX game were appropriate and useful, and the ability to customize the SPARX characters with Māori designs was beneficial and appeared to enhance cultural identity. These helped young people to feel engaged with SPARX which, in turn, assisted with the acquisition of relaxation and cognitive restructuring skills. Overall, using SPARX led to improved mood and increased levels of hope for the participants. In some instances, SPARX was used by wider whānau (Māori word for family) members with reported beneficial effect. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this small group of Māori adolescents reported that cultural designs made it easier for them to engage with SPARX, which, in turn, led to an improvement in their mood and gave them hope. Further research is needed about how SPARX could be best used to support the families of these young people.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".