MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204537186 · doi:10.2196/28734

Transitioning From In-Person to Remote Clinical Research on Depression and Traumatic Brain Injury During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Study Modifications and Preliminary Feasibility From a Randomized Controlled Pilot Study

2021· article· en· W3204537186 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lauren Fisher, Sylvie Tuchman, Andrew J. Curreri, Maggie Markgraf, Maren Nyer, Paolo Cassano, Grant L. Iverson, Maurizio Fava, Ross Zafonte, Paola Pedrelli

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsTelehealthPsychosocialTelemedicineRandomized controlled trialMedicineAttendancePsychological interventionMental healthClinical trialTraumatic brain injuryPopulationPsychiatryHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Telehealth has provided many researchers, especially those conducting psychosocial research, with the tools necessary to transition from in-person to remote clinical trials during the COVID-19 pandemic. A growing body of research supports the effectiveness of telemental health for a variety of psychiatric conditions, but few studies have examined telemental health for individuals with comorbid medical diagnoses. Furthermore, little is known about the remote implementation of clinical trials examining telemental health interventions. OBJECTIVE: This paper outlines the procedural modifications used to facilitate conversion of an in-person randomized controlled trial of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for depression in individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI; CBT-TBI) to a telemental health study administered remotely. METHODS: Given the nature of remote implementation and specific challenges experienced by individuals with TBI, considerations related to treatment delivery, remote consent, data management, neuropsychological assessment, safety monitoring, and delivery of supportive material have been discussed. Feasibility, acceptability, and safety were evaluated by examining attendance and participant responses on self-report measures of treatment satisfaction and suicidal behavior. RESULTS: High rates of treatment attendance, assessment completion, study retention, and satisfaction with the intervention and modality were reported by participants who completed at least one telemental health CBT-TBI session. CONCLUSIONS: Study modifications are necessary when conducting a study remotely, and special attention should be paid to comorbidities and population-specific challenges (eg, cognitive impairment). Preliminary data support the feasibility, acceptability, and safety of remotely conducting a randomized controlled trial of CBT-TBI. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03307070; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03307070.

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)0.086
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.075
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0860.075
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.460
GPT teacher head0.562
Teacher spread0.102 · 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.

Study designNon-randomized trial
DomainMethods
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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207