Effects of a Digital Mental Health Program on Perceived Stress in Adolescents Aged 13-17 Years: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Stress is an important transdiagnostic risk factor in adolescence and predicts a host of physical and psychological problems in adolescence and adulthood. Adolescence is also a developmental stage in which people may be more sensitive or reactive to stress. Indeed, research has shown that adolescents report high levels of stress, particularly when enrolled in school. However, adolescents report engaging in few, if any, stress management techniques. Consequently, the development of effective programs to help address adolescent stress is particularly important. To date, most stress management programs for adolescents are delivered within schools, and the evidence for such programs is mixed. Furthermore, most of these programs rely on traditional stress management techniques rather than incorporating methods to address the underlying negative cognitive processes, such as rumination, that may contribute to or exacerbate the effects of perceived stress. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to test the short-term effects of a digital mental health program designed for adolescents aged 13-17 years on perceived stress and rumination. METHODS: This is a randomized controlled trial in which adolescents between the ages of 13 and 17 years, with elevated levels of perceived stress and brooding, will be randomly assigned to complete 8 weeks of a digital mental health program (Happify for Teens) or to a corresponding wait-list control group. The study will take place over 3 months, including the 8-week intervention period and 1-month postintervention follow-up. The primary outcome, perceived stress, along with secondary and exploratory outcomes (ie, brooding, optimism, sleep disturbance, and loneliness) will be assessed via self-report at baseline, 4 weeks, 8 weeks, and 12 weeks to compare changes in these outcomes across conditions. RESULTS: Recruitment is expected to begin in the second quarter of 2021, with a target sample size of 800 participants (400 per condition). Participants will begin the study as they are recruited and will finish in waves, with the first wave of data expected 8 weeks after recruitment begins and the final wave of data expected by the end of the third quarter of 2021. CONCLUSIONS: Although school-based stress management programs for adolescents are common, research suggests that they may be limited in their reach and more effective for school-based stress than other types of stress. This trial will be one of the first attempts to examine the potential benefits of a digital mental health program on adolescents to address stress along with negative cognitive processes such as rumination. If successful, this would help introduce a more scalable alternative to school-based programs that offers adolescents greater privacy while also providing insight into novel ways to target adolescent mental health more generally. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04567888; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04567888. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/25545.
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 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 | 0.034 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.077 | 0.012 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".