MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3168347615 · doi:10.2196/27137

Recovery Following Peer and Text Messaging Support After Discharge From Acute Psychiatric Care in Edmonton, Alberta: Controlled Observational Study

2021· article· en· W3168347615 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Reham Shalaby, Marianne Hrabok, Pamela Spurvey, Rabab M Abou El-Magd, Michelle Knox, Rebecca Rude, Wesley Vuong, Shireen Surood, Liana Urichuk, Mark Snaterse, Andrew J. Greenshaw, Xin‐Min Li, Vincent I. O. Agyapong

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Health Services
KeywordsObservational studyPeer supportSocial supportMental healthPsychologyDescriptive statisticsScale (ratio)Randomized controlled trialMedicinePsychiatrySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Peer support is an emotional, social, and practical help provided by nonprofessionals to assist others in sustaining health behaviors. Peer support is valued in recovery-oriented models of mental health and is becoming increasingly implemented at the organizational level. Text messaging is a relatively low-cost, high-impact, and easily scalable program that uses existing technology, is devoid of geographic barriers, and is easily accessible to end users. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of an innovative peer support system plus a supportive text messaging program on the recovery of discharged patients from acute psychiatric care. METHODS: This prospective, rater blinded, controlled observational study included 181 patients who were discharged from acute psychiatric care. Patients were randomized to one of four conditions: treatment as usual (follow-up care), daily supportive text messages only, peer support only, or peer support plus daily supportive text messages. A standardized self-report measure of recovery (Recovery Assessment Scale [RAS]) was completed at baseline, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. Descriptive analysis, one-way analysis of variance, and repeated measures multivariate analysis of covariance were used to examine the changes in the RAS among the study groups and over the follow-up time points. RESULTS: A total of 65 patients completed the assessments at each time point. For the overall sample, higher scores were found for the peer support plus text message condition compared with the text message only and treatment as usual condition on several scales (ie, willingness to ask for help and personal confidence and hope) and total score on the RAS, after 6 months of intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Peer support plus supportive text messaging seems to result in improved recovery compared with other interventions. It may be advisable to incorporate the two interventions as part of routine practice for patients with psychiatric disorders upon hospital discharge.

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)0.004
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 score0.626
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.199
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207