MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2939941939 · doi:10.1037/rep0000276

Patient perspectives of Internet-delivered cognitive behavior therapy for psychosocial issues post spinal cord injury.

2019· article· en· W2939941939 on OpenAlexafffund
Swati Mehta, Heather D. Hadjistavropoulos, Danielle Earis, Nickolai Titov, Blake F. Dear

Bibliographic record

VenueRehabilitation Psychology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSaskatchewan Health Research Foundation
KeywordsPsychosocialThematic analysisMental healthPsycINFOAnxietyPsychologyMedicineQualitative researchClinical psychologyMEDLINEPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Many individuals with a spinal cord injury (SCI) report significant symptoms of depression and/or anxiety post-SCI; however, access to mental health services can be limited. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient perspectives on the acceptability of an 8-week guided Internet-delivered cognitive behavior therapy (ICBT) course (Chronic Conditions Course) for people with SCI. In particular, we sought to understand patient perceptions of facilitators and barriers of engaging in ICBT and strengths and weaknesses of ICBT program content. METHOD: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 8 SCI patients after completion of the ICBT course. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and examined by means of thematic analysis by 2 coders. RESULTS: Eight participants (mean age = 53.2 years; males = 50%; paraplegia = 67.5%) were interviewed. Four major themes emerged when examining facilitators to completing the program: accessibility, flexibility, motivation, and guided support. Barriers to completing the program included course timeframe and physical health. Strengths of the course included effective skill development and mental health prioritization. Suggested changes to the course included improved breadth of case stories, development of extra resources, adjusting the course timeframe to account for the SCI, and more support from the guide. CONCLUSIONS: ICBT was overall highlighted as an acceptable method of receiving care for people with SCI. The study provides direction for improving delivery of ICBT to ensure this method of treatment meets the needs of individuals with SCI. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.432 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRehabilitation PsychologySame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207