MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3167911763 · doi:10.2196/28321

Intervention Use and Symptom Change With Unguided Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depression During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Log Data Analysis of a Convenience Sample

2021· article· en· W3167911763 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Caroline Oehler, Katharina Scholze, Hanna Reich, Christian Sander, Ulrich Hegerl

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Mental Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)MedicinePsychological interventionDepression (economics)PandemicTelehealthPatient Health QuestionnaireRegression analysisCognitive behavioral therapyTelemedicineClinical psychologyPhysical therapyHealth carePsychiatryCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)AnxietyDepressive symptomsInternal medicineMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Internet- and mobile-based interventions are most efficacious in the treatment of depression when they involve some form of guidance, but providing guidance requires resources such as trained personnel, who might not always be available (eg, during lockdowns to contain the COVID-19 pandemic). OBJECTIVE: The current analysis focuses on changes in symptoms of depression in a guided sample of patients with depression who registered for an internet-based intervention, the iFightDepression tool, as well as the extent of intervention use, compared to an unguided sample. The objective is to further understand the effects of guidance and adherence on the intervention's potential to induce symptom change. METHODS: Log data from two convenience samples in German routine care were used to assess symptom change after 6-9 weeks of intervention as well as minimal dose (finishing at least two workshops). A linear regression model with changes in Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) score as a dependent variable and guidance and minimal dose as well as their interaction as independent variables was specified. RESULTS: Data from 1423 people with symptoms of depression (n=940 unguided, 66.1%) were included in the current analysis. In the linear regression model predicting symptom change, a significant interaction of guidance and minimal dose revealed a specifically greater improvement for patients who received guidance and also worked with the intervention content (β=-1.75, t=-2.37, P=.02), while there was little difference in symptom change due to guidance in the group that did not use the intervention. In this model, the main effect of guidance was only marginally significant (β=-.53, t=-1.78, P=.08). CONCLUSIONS: Guidance in internet-based interventions for depression is not only an important factor to facilitate adherence, but also seems to further improve results for patients adhering to the intervention compared to those who do the same but without guidance.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.263
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations26
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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