MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4283767461 · doi:10.2196/36021

An mHealth Platform for Augmenting Behavioral Health in Primary Care: Longitudinal Feasibility Study

2022· article· en· W4283767461 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Khatiya Moon, Michael Sobolev, Megan Grella, George Alvarado, Manish Sapra, Trever Ball

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsmHealthCollaborative CareHealth careMedicineTelemedicinePrimary carePoint of careeHealthBaseline (sea)NursingPsychologyFamily medicinePsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The collaborative care model is a well-established system of behavioral health care within primary care settings. There is potential for mobile health (mHealth) technology to augment collaborative behavioral health care in primary care settings, thereby improving scalability, efficiency, and clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the feasibility of engaging with and the preliminary clinical outcomes of an mHealth platform that was used to augment an existing collaborative care program in primary care settings. METHODS: We performed a longitudinal, single-arm feasibility study of an mHealth platform that was used to augment collaborative care. A total of 3 behavioral health care managers, who were responsible for coordinating disease management in 6 primary care practices, encouraged participants to use a mobile app to augment the collaborative model of behavioral health care. The mHealth platform's functions included asynchronous chats with the behavioral health care managers, depression self-report assessments, and psychoeducational content. The primary outcome was the feasibility of engagement, which was based on the number and type of participant-generated actions that were completed in the app. The primary clinical end point was a comparison of the baseline and final assessments of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. RESULTS: Of the 245 individuals who were referred by their primary care provider for behavioral health services, 89 (36.3%) consented to app-augmented behavioral health care. Only 12% (11/89) never engaged with the app during the study period. Across all participants, we observed a median engagement of 7 (IQR 12; mean 10.4; range 0-130) actions in the app (participants: n=78). The chat function was the most popular, followed by psychoeducational content and assessments. The subgroup analysis revealed no significant differences in app usage by age (P=.42) or sex (P=.84). The clinical improvement rate in our sample was 73% (32/44), although follow-up assessments were only available for 49% (44/89) of participants. CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary findings indicate the moderate feasibility of using mHealth technology to augment behavioral health care in primary care settings. The results of this study are applicable to improving the design and implementation of mobile apps in collaborative care.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.119

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.304
GPT teacher head0.607
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicMobile Health and mHealth Applications→French-language works237,207→