Web-Based Delivery of a Family-Based Dating Violence Prevention Program for Youth Who Have Been Exposed to Intimate Partner Violence: Protocol for an Acceptability and Feasibility Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children exposed to intimate partner violence (IPV) between caregivers are at an increased risk of becoming involved in dating violence during adolescence. However, to date, few adolescent dating violence (ADV) prevention programs have been developed for and evaluated with youth exposed to IPV. An exception is Moms and Teens for Safe Dates (MTSD), an evidence-based ADV prevention program for mothers or maternal caregivers (mothers) exposed to IPV and their teenagers. The MTSD program comprises a series of booklets that families complete together in a home that includes activities to promote positive family communication and healthy teenager relationships. We developed a web-adapted version of the MTSD program-entitled eMoms and Teens for Safe Dates (eMTSD)-to provide a delivery format that may increase program appeal for digitally oriented teenagers, lower dissemination costs, lower reading burden for low-literacy participants, and incorporate built-in cues and reminders to boost program adherence. OBJECTIVE: This protocol is for a research study that has the following three main objectives: to assess the acceptability of eMTSD; to identify the feasibility of the research process, including program adherence and participant recruitment and assessment; and to explore the acceptability, feasibility, and preliminary efficacy of 2 features-text reminders and the creation of an action plan for engaging with the program-that may increase program uptake and completion. METHODS: Approximately 100 mothers and their teenagers will be invited to complete eMTSD, which includes six 30-minute web-based modules over a 6-week period. Mothers will be recruited through community organizations and social media advertising and will be eligible to participate if they have at least 1 teenager aged 12 to 16 years living with them, have experienced IPV after the teenager was born, are not currently living with an abusive partner, and have access to an internet-enabled device. Using a factorial design, enrolled dyads will be randomized to the following four adherence support groups (n=25 dyads per group): text reminders and action planning, text reminders only, action planning only, and no adherence supports. All participants will complete brief web-based assessments at enrollment after each module is completed, after the full program is completed, and 90 days after enrollment. Program adherence will be tracked using website use metrics. RESULTS: The data collected will be synthesized to assess the acceptability of the program and the feasibility of the study procedures. An exploratory analysis will examine the impact of adherence support on program completion levels. In November 2021, ethical approval was received and recruitment was initiated. Data collection is expected to continue until December 2022. CONCLUSIONS: The web-based delivery of a family-based healthy relationship program for teenagers exposed to IPV may offer a convenient, low-cost, and engaging approach to preventing ADV. The findings from this study are expected to guide future research. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/35487.
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 | 0.033 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.066 | 0.011 |
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".