MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199438288 · doi:10.2196/31722

Practical and Emotional Problems Reported by Users of a Self-guided Digital Problem-solving Intervention During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Content Analysis

2021· article· en· W3199438288 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amira Hentati, Erik Forsell, Brjánn Ljótsson, Martin Kraepelien

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicProblem Solving Skills Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSveriges RegeringSocialdepartementetKarolinska Institutet
KeywordsPsychological interventionAnxietyPandemicPopulationIntervention (counseling)PsychologyDepression (economics)Set (abstract data type)Clinical psychologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychiatryMedicineComputer scienceDiseaseEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: To better direct assessments and interventions toward the general population during both the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and future crises with societal restrictions, data on the types of practical and emotional problems that people are experiencing are needed. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the types of practical and emotional problems that the general population is experiencing during the COVID-19 pandemic and to construct an empirically derived inventory based on the findings. METHODS: A total of 396 participants, recruited among members of the general public in Sweden who were experiencing practical and/or emotional problems during the pandemic, accessed a self-guided digital problem-solving intervention for a period of 1 week to report and solve the problems they experienced. Prior to accessing the intervention, the participants completed a short self-assessment regarding symptoms of depression and anxiety. Content analysis was used to account for the types of problems participants reported. A set of items for an inventory was later proposed based on the problem categories derived from the analysis. RESULTS: A majority of participants had clinically relevant symptoms of either depression or anxiety. The problems reported were categorized as 13 distinct types of problems. The most common problem was difficulty managing daily activities. Based on the categories, a 13-item inventory was proposed. CONCLUSIONS: The 13 types of problems, and the proposed inventory, could be valuable when composing assessments and interventions for the general population during the ongoing pandemic or similar crises with societal restrictions. The most common problem was of a practical nature, indicating the importance of including examples of such problems within assessments and interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04677270; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04677270.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.274
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicProblem Solving Skills DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207