MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092178332 · doi:10.2196/21075

Examining an App-Based Mental Health Self-Care Program, IntelliCare for College Students: Single-Arm Pilot Study

2020· article· en· W3092178332 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Emily G. Lattie, Katherine Cohen, Nathan Winquist, David C. Mohr

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Mental Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMental healthPsychosocialUsabilityAnxietyPsychologyDepression (economics)Medical educationMedicineClinical psychologyPsychiatryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In recent years, there has been an increase in symptoms of depression, anxiety, and other mental illnesses in college student populations alongside a steady rise in the demand for counseling services. Digital mental health programs, such as those delivered through mobile apps, can add to the array of available services but must be tested for usability and acceptability before implementation. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to examine how students used IntelliCare for College Students over an 8-week period to examine the preliminary associations between app use and psychosocial targets and to gather user feedback about usability issues that need to be remedied before a larger implementation study. METHODS: IntelliCare for College Students is an app-based platform that provides symptom assessments with personalized feedback, information about campus resources, lessons on mental health and wellness topics, and access to the suite of interactive skill-focused IntelliCare apps. A total of 20 students were recruited to participate in an 8-week study. To test for a broad range of potential users, we recruited a mixed sample of students with elevated symptoms of depression or anxiety and students without elevated symptoms. Participants completed psychosocial questionnaires at baseline, week 4, and week 8. Participants also completed user feedback interviews at weeks 4 and 8 in which they provided feedback on their experience using the app and suggestions for changes they would like to be made to the app. RESULTS: Of the 20 students who downloaded the app, 19 completed the study, indicating a high rate of retention. Over the study period, participants completed an average of 5.85 (SD 2.1; range 1-8) symptom assessments. Significant improvements were observed in the Anxiety Literacy Questionnaire scores (Z=-2.006; P=.045) and in the frequency with which participants used both cognitive (Z=-2.091; P=.04) and behavioral (Z=-2.249; P=.03) coping skills. In the feedback interviews, we identified a high degree of usability with minor bugs in the app software, which were quickly fixed. Furthermore, in feedback interviews, we identified that users found the app to be convenient and appreciated the ability to use the program in short bursts of time. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that the IntelliCare for College Students program was perceived as largely usable and engaging. Although the program demonstrated usability and preliminary benefits to students, further testing is needed to determine its clinical utility among college students. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04035577; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04035577.

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)0.001
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations55
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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