A Mobile App for Stress Management in Middle-Aged Men and Women (Calm): Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Middle-aged adults (40-65 years) report higher stress levels than most other age groups. There is a need to determine the feasibility of using a meditation app to reduce stress and improve stress-related outcomes in middle-aged adults with a focus on men, as previous meditation app-based studies have reported a low proportion of or even no male participants. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to (1) determine the feasibility (ie, acceptability and demand with a focus on men) of a consumer-based meditation app (Calm), to reduce stress among middle-aged adults reporting elevated stress levels, and (2) explore the preliminary effects of Calm on perceived stress, psychological outcomes (anxiety, depressive symptoms, mindfulness, and general coping), health behaviors (physical activity and eating habits), and COVID-19 perceptions. METHODS: This feasibility randomized controlled trial evaluated an app-based meditation intervention in middle-aged adults (N=83) with elevated stress levels (ie, Perceived Stress Scale score ≥15) and limited or no previous experience with meditation. Participants were randomized to the intervention group (Calm app) or a control (educational podcasts; POD) group. Participants completed self-report assessments at baseline and postintervention (week 4). Feasibility was measured as acceptability and demand using Bowen framework. Feasibility and COVID-19 perceptions data were examined using descriptive statistics, and preliminary effects were evaluated using repeated measures analysis of variance. RESULTS: Participants were satisfied with Calm (27/28, 96%) and found it appropriate or useful (26/28, 93%). Most reported they would likely continue using the Calm app (18/28, 64%). More Calm users reported satisfaction, appropriateness or usefulness, and intent to continue app use than POD users. Calm users (n=33) completed a mean of 20 (SD 31.1) minutes of meditation on the days they meditated and 103 (SD 109.1) minutes of meditation per week. The average adherence rate to the prescribed meditation was 71% among Calm app users, compared to 62% among POD users. Recruitment rate of men was 35% (29/83). Of those randomized to Calm, 55% (15/29) were men, and retention among them was higher (14/15, 93%) than that among women (12/20, 60%). No significant within or between group differences were observed. CONCLUSIONS: A 4-week, app-based mindfulness meditation intervention (Calm) may be feasible for middle-aged adults and a useful stress-management tool. Calm users expressed satisfaction with the app and felt it was appropriate and useful. Significant improvements in perceived stress and psychological outcomes or stress-related health behaviors were not observed. Even though men spent less time in meditation than women did and completed fewer weekly sessions, they were more likely to adhere to the prescription. Further research is needed for improving stress and stress-related outcomes among middle-aged adults with emphasis on the effects of mindfulness meditation apps for men. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04272138; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04272138.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".