MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3213960615 · doi:10.1016/j.invent.2021.100481

Insights into internet-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy for public safety personnel: Exploration of client experiences during and after treatment

2021· article· en· W3213960615 on OpenAlexaffabout
Janine D. Beahm, Hugh C McCall, R. Nicholas Carleton, Nickolai Titov, Blake F. Dear, Heather D. Hadjistavropoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueInternet Interventions · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersAustralian Government
KeywordsThematic analysisMental healthPsychologyCognitionQualitative researchThe InternetPerceptionApplied psychologyNursingMedical educationMedicinePsychotherapistPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canadian public safety personnel (PSP) experience high rates of mental health problems and barriers to receiving care. Internet-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy (ICBT) may help reduce barriers to care; however, there is no literature involving qualitative analyses of client feedback to describe PSP experiences with ICBT. Identifying these experiences is important because it can inform future use of ICBT with this group that has unique needs. The current study was designed to explore how clients (N = 82) experienced ICBT that had been tailored to meet their needs; specifically, the study assessed their perceptions of program impacts, what clients found helpful, and client suggestions for improvements. The ICBT course included five core lessons, client stories, and nine initial additional resources, as well as flexible frequencies (optional, once weekly, or twice weekly) and durations (8 to 16 weeks) of therapist support. A qualitative reliability thematic analysis was used to analyze client communications and feedback. Responses to a Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire administered at eight weeks post-enrollment were available for 57 clients. Client emails with therapists were also examined among all clients, including an additional 25 clients who did not complete the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire. Themes identified in the qualitative analyses were related to: reported impacts and hindering events, helpful and challenging course skills and content, helpful aspects of the course, and areas for improvement. Clients who completed the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire and those who did not reported beneficial impacts from the program, with the most commonly endorsed themes being skill development and normalizing mental health issues. Hindering events were experienced by both groups and included timeline challenges, technology challenges, and negative effects. Comments from both groups suggested that clients had more success than challenges when practicing the skills. Thought challenging was the skill most frequently identified as helpful. Clients described many aspects of the program as helpful with the most frequently endorsed themes being the course format and content, the flexible nature of the course, access to additional materials and case stories, and therapist assistance. Clients also provided suggestions for improving the course (e.g., case stories, additional resources, timelines audio and videos). Overall, client communications suggest that ICBT is accepted and perceived as beneficial among PSP. These results informed rapid improvements to the ICBT program tailored for PSP and may inform others seeking to provide digital mental health services to PSP.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations26
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternet InterventionsSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207