MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3163093040 · doi:10.1145/3411764.3445238

Assessing Social Anxiety Through Digital Biomarkers Embedded in a Gaming Task

2021· article· en· W3163093040 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Dechant, Julian Frommel, Regan L. Mandryk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial anxietyAnxietyTask (project management)Computer scienceIdentification (biology)Digital healthIntervention (counseling)Applied psychologyPsychologyMultimediaHuman–computer interactionCognitive psychologyHealth careEngineeringPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Digital biomarkers of mental health issues offer many advantages, including timely identification for early intervention, ongoing assessment during treatment, and reducing barriers to assessment stemming from geography, age, fear, or disparities in access to systems of care. Embedding digital biomarkers into games may further increase the reach of digital assessment. In this study, we explore game-based digital biomarkers for social anxiety, based on interaction with a non-player character (NPC). We show that social anxiety affects a player's accuracy and their movement path in a gaming task involving an NPC. Further, we compared first versus third-person camera perspectives and the use of customized versus predefined avatars to explore the influence of common game interface factors on the expression of social anxiety through in-game movements. Our findings provide new insights about how game-based digital biomarkers can be effectively used for social anxiety, affording the benefits of early and ongoing digital assessment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.370 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations33
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207