Lessons learned from two feasibility trials of a translated and minimally monitored iCBT program for young adults among community and university samples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Young adults are less likely to use traditional mental health services than adults. iCBT may be more youth friendly, but its access remains limited in several countries. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility of a minimally monitored transdiagnostic iCBT program translated from English to French and offered in Canada for the treatment of anxiety and depression among young adults. The impact of the program on resilience was also assessed. Twenty-five participants from community and university samples were included in the analyses in two separate single-group feasibility trials with a 3-month follow-up. Feasibility outcomes were attrition, adherence, treatment acceptability and treatment gains. Outcome measures included the Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item (GAD-7) and Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). In Trial 1 (N = 10), recruiting among the general population proved to be challenging. Low adherence (20%) and high attrition (80%) rates were observed. Methodological changes to recruitment were made and a second trial was conducted among university students using incentives (N = 15). About half of the participants completed treatment (55%, n = 8/15), 12/15 provided post-treatment data and 8/15 provided 3-month follow-up data. All study completers (100%; n = 14) reported they would recommend the program. Mixed effects model analyses revealed significant and large pre-post treatment reductions on the PHQ-9 and GAD-7 (Cohen's d = 1.09 and 1.64 respectively) with treatment gains maintained at follow-up. Moderate improvements were found on the CD-RISC post-treatment with further gains at follow-up (ds = 0.55 and 1.10 respectively). These finding suggest that future research on this French-Canadian version of the Mood Mechanic Course is feasible with appropriate attention to recruitment. Translating existing iCBT interventions and using minimal monitoring may be an optimal first step to initiate the cross-cultural dissemination of iCBT while increasing access to treatments among young adults. Lessons learned are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.182 | 0.281 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".