MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902724093 · doi:10.1111/bjhp.12347

Use of dynamic systems methods to characterize dyadic interactions in smoking cessation behavioural support sessions: A feasibility study

2018· article· en· W2902724093 on OpenAlexafffund
Heather L. Gainforth, Fabiana Lorencatto, Karl Erickson, Kristy Baxter, K Papafotiou Owens, Susan Michie, Robert West

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Health Psychology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusKelowna General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsPsychologyReciprocity (cultural anthropology)Smoking cessationObservational studyApplied psychologyReliability (semiconductor)Computer scienceCognitive psychologyClinical psychologySocial psychologyMedicineStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Understanding how behaviour change techniques (BCTs) operate in practice requires a method for characterizing the reciprocal, dynamic, and real-time nature of behavioural support interactions between practitioners and clients. State space grids (SSGs) are an observational, dynamic systems methodology used to map the trajectory of dyadic interactions in real time. By mapping the flow of events in terms of practitioner and client actions, SSGs are potentially well suited to characterize behavioural support sessions. PURPOSE: To develop reliable methods and examine the feasibility of using the SSG methodology for characterizing practitioners' delivery of and clients' response to BCTs in smoking cessation behavioural support sessions. METHODS: Smoking cessation behavioural support sessions were video-recorded and transcribed verbatim (n = 6 recordings; 2,916 statements). All speech was coded independently by two researchers for content and duration using published frameworks for specifying practitioner-delivered and client-received BCTs in smoking cessation interactions. Inter-rater reliability was assessed. Indices of practitioner-client interaction dynamics were derived: (1) reciprocity (i.e., attractor states, content congruence, conditional pairing) and (2) temporal patterning (i.e., variability, inter-grid distance, combinatory micro-patterning, sessional macropatterning). The extent to which indices can describe differences between sessions involving different practitioners and clients was examined. RESULTS: Inter-rater reliability was moderate at 72% agreement. Indices of reciprocity and temporal patterning characterized differences between sessions involving different practitioners and clients. CONCLUSIONS: State space grids provide a method for characterizing the complexity and variability of practitioner-delivered and client-received BCTs in behavioural support sessions. This method has potential to add explanatory value to smoking cessation intervention outcomes. Statement of Contribution What is already known on this subject? Frameworks exist for characterizing practitioner-delivered and client-received behaviour change techniques (BCTs). Methods are still needed to investigate which BCTs are effective under what conditions. State space grids (SSGs) are a dynamic systems method that may better characterize behavioural support interactions. What does this study add? First reliable, dynamic systems, SSG coding procedures, methods, and measures to characterize behavioural support. A method for examining reciprocality and temporal patterning of BCT delivery and receipt. Establishes a dynamic systems method that adds explanatory value to the outcomes of interventions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.364
GPT teacher head0.578
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Health PsychologySame topicBehavioral Health and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207