Effectiveness of a Smartphone App (BioBase) for Reducing Anxiety and Increasing Mental Well-Being: Pilot Feasibility and Acceptability Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The prevalence of workplace-related stress and anxiety is high, resulting in stress-related physical and mental illness. Digital self-guided interventions aimed at key areas of workplace design may be able to provide remote anxiolytic effects. Objective The aim of this feasibility study is to assess changes in anxiety and mental well-being after use of the BioBase programme, a mobile phone platform for psycho-educational modules, tools, and real-time feedback of physiological data. Methods A 4-week observational study was carried out in 55 healthy adults who were screened for stress with the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS) Stress subscale. Participants completed anxiety (6-item State-Trait Anxiety Inventory [STAI]) and mental well-being (Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale [WEMWBS]) questionnaires at baseline and at 4 weeks. Feedback questionnaires were administered after 4 weeks. Results After 4 weeks of using the programme and controlling for any effect of being paid to take part in the study, STAI significantly decreased (baseline mean 45.52 [SD 13.2]; 4-week mean 39.82 [SD 11.2]; t54=–3.51; P<.001; CI –8.88 to –2.52; Cohen d=0.96) and WEMWBS significantly increased (baseline mean 48.12 [SD 6.4]; 4-week mean 50.4 [SD 6.9]; t53=2.41; P=.019; CI 0.44-4.23; Cohen d=0.66). Further, higher baseline stress was significantly associated with a greater decrease in STAI (t53=–3.41; P=.001; CI –8.10 to –2.10; R2=0.180) and a greater increase in WEMWBS (t52=2.41; P=.019; CI 0.38-4.11, R2=0.101). On feedback, participants found the programme easy to use/navigate, with the content being acceptable and relevant to workplace-related stressors; 70% (21/30) of participants would recommend the programme to a friend. Conclusions The BioBase programme is a potentially effective intervention in decreasing anxiety and increasing mental well-being, with larger changes in those with higher baseline levels of stress.
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 | 0.005 | 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".