MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2948200407 · doi:10.2196/13152

Exploring Young People’s Perceptions of the Effectiveness of Text-Based Online Counseling: Mixed Methods Pilot Study

2019· article· en· W2948200407 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pablo Navarro, Matthew Bambling, Jeanie Sheffield, Sisira Edirippulige

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Mental Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPerceptionMedical educationApplied psychologyClinical psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Young people aged 10-24 years are at the highest risk for mental health problems and are the least likely to seek professional treatment. Owing to this population's high consumption of internet content, electronic mental (e-mental) health services have increased globally, with an aim to address barriers to treatment. Many of these services use text-based online counseling (TBOC), which shows promising results in supporting young people but also greater variance in outcomes compared with adult comparators. OBJECTIVE: This pilot study qualitatively explored the characteristics of users aged 15-25 years accessing TBOC services, their motivations for access, and their perceptions about factors believed to influence the effectiveness of these modalities. METHODS: E-surveys were administered naturalistically to 100 young service users aged 15-25 years who accessed webchat and email counseling services via an Australian e-mental health service. Thematic analysis of qualitative themes and quantitative descriptive and proportional data presented in electronic surveys were examined across the areas of user characteristics, motivations for selecting TBOC modalities, and their perceptions of TBOC effectiveness. RESULTS: Participants were predominately female high school students of Caucasian or European descent from middle socioeconomic status, living with their parents in major cities. Four domains and various themes and subthemes were related to participants' reasons for accessing TBOC and perceptions of its effectiveness: user characteristics (ie, physical and mental health syndrome and perceived social difficulties), selection factors (ie, safety, avoidance motivation, accessibility, and expectation), factors perceived to increase effectiveness (ie, general therapeutic benefits, positive modality and service factors, and persisting with counseling to increase benefit), and factors perceived to decrease effectiveness (ie, negative modality and service factors, and persisting with counseling despite benefit). CONCLUSIONS: Participants were motivated to use TBOC to increase their sense of safety in response to negative perceptions of their social skills and the response of the online counsellor to their presenting problem. By using TBOC services, they also sought to improve their access to mental health services that better met their expectations. Factors that increased effectiveness of TBOC were the counsellor's interpersonal skills, use of text-based communication, and persisting with beneficial counseling sessions. Factors that reduced TBOC effectiveness were poor timeliness in response to service requests, experiencing no change in their presenting problem, not knowing what postcounseling action to take, and persisting with ineffective counseling sessions.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.108
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.363 · 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.

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

Citations63
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Mental HealthSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207