MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3028184988 · doi:10.2196/18990

Blended Digital and Face-to-Face Care for First-Episode Psychosis Treatment in Young People: Qualitative Study

2020· article· en· W3028184988 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lee Valentine, Carla McEnery, Imogen Bell, Shaunagh O’Sullivan, Ingrid Pryor, John Gleeson, Sarah Bendall, Mario Álvarez‐Jiménez

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Mental Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilState Government of VictoriaAustralian GovernmentNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMcCusker Charitable Foundation
KeywordsMental healthThematic analysisPsychologyQualitative researchOnline and offlinePsychological interventionDigital healthSuperordinate goalsHealth careBlended learningPsychotherapistPsychiatryComputer scienceSocial psychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A small number of studies have found that digital mental health interventions can be feasible and acceptable for young people experiencing first-episode psychosis; however, little research has examined how they might be blended with face-to-face approaches in order to enhance care. Blended treatment refers to the integration of digital and face-to-face mental health care. It has the potential to capitalize on the evidence-based features of both individual modalities, while also exceeding the sum of its parts. This integration could bridge the online-offline treatment divide and better reflect the interconnected, and often complementary, ways young people navigate their everyday digital and physical lives. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to gain young people's perspectives on the design and implementation of a blended model of care in first-episode psychosis treatment. METHODS: This qualitative study was underpinned by an end-user development framework and was based on semistructured interviews with 10 participants aged 19 to 28 (mean 23.4, SD 2.62). A thematic analysis was used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Three superordinate themes emerged relating to young people's perspectives on the design and implementation of a blended model of care in first-episode psychosis treatment: (1) blended features, (2) cautions, and (3) therapeutic alliance. CONCLUSIONS: We found that young people were very enthusiastic about the prospect of blended models of mental health care, in so far as it was used to enhance their experience of traditional face-to-face treatment but not to replace it overall. Aspects of blended treatment that could enhance clinical care were readily identified by young people as increasing accessibility, continuity, and consolidation; accessing posttherapy support; strengthening the relationship between young person and clinician; and tracking personal data that could be used to better inform clinical decision making. Future research is needed to investigate the efficacy of blended models of care by evaluating its impact on the therapeutic alliance, clinical and social outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and engagement.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.408 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations50
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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