A Text Messaging Intervention for Coping With Social Distancing During COVID-19 (StayWell at Home): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Social distancing is a crucial intervention to slow down person-to-person transmission of COVID-19. However, social distancing has negative consequences, including increases in depression and anxiety. Digital interventions, such as text messaging, can provide accessible support on a population-wide scale. We developed text messages in English and Spanish to help individuals manage their depressive mood and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: In a two-arm randomized controlled trial, we aim to examine the effect of our 60-day text messaging intervention. Additionally, we aim to assess whether the use of machine learning to adapt the messaging frequency and content improves the effectiveness of the intervention. Finally, we will examine the differences in daily mood ratings between the message categories and time windows. METHODS: The messages were designed within two different categories: behavioral activation and coping skills. Participants will be randomized into (1) a random messaging arm, where message category and timing will be chosen with equal probabilities, and (2) a reinforcement learning arm, with a learned decision mechanism for choosing the messages. Participants in both arms will receive one message per day within three different time windows and will be asked to provide their mood rating 3 hours later. We will compare self-reported daily mood ratings; self-reported depression, using the 8-item Patient Health Questionnaire; and self-reported anxiety, using the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale at baseline and at intervention completion. RESULTS: The Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects at the University of California Berkeley approved this study in April 2020 (No. 2020-04-13162). Data collection began in April 2020 and will run to April 2021. As of August 24, 2020, we have enrolled 229 participants. We plan to submit manuscripts describing the main results of the trial and results from the microrandomized trial for publication in peer-reviewed journals and for presentations at national and international scientific meetings. CONCLUSIONS: Results will contribute to our knowledge of effective psychological tools to alleviate the negative effects of social distancing and the benefit of using machine learning to personalize digital mental health interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04473599; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04473599. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/23592.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | high |
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.101 | 0.013 |
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".