MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309659478 · doi:10.2196/40242

Chatbot-Delivered Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in Adolescents With Depression and Anxiety During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Feasibility and Acceptability Study

2022· article· en· W4309659478 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institutes of HealthInstitute of Clinical and Translational Sciences
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialMedicinePsychological interventionAnxietyMental healthCognitive behavioral therapyPsychiatrymHealthDepression (economics)Suicidal ideationTelemedicinePsychoeducationHealth careClinical psychologyPoison controlSuicide preventionMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Symptoms of depression and anxiety, suicidal ideation, and self-harm have escalated among adolescents to crisis levels during the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, primary care providers (PCPs) are often called on to provide first-line care for these youth. Digital health interventions can extend mental health specialty care, but few are evidence based. We evaluated the feasibility of delivering an evidence-based mobile health (mHealth) app with an embedded conversational agent to deliver cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) to symptomatic adolescents presenting in primary care settings during the pandemic. OBJECTIVE: In this 12-week pilot study, we evaluated the feasibility of delivering the app-based intervention to adolescents aged 13 to 17 years with moderate depressive symptoms who were treated in a practice-based research network (PBRN) of academically affiliated primary care clinics. We also obtained preliminary estimates of app acceptability, effectiveness, and usability. METHODS: This small, pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluated depressive symptom severity in adolescents randomized to the app or to a wait list control condition. The primary end point was depression severity at 4-weeks, measured by the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Data on acceptability, feasibility, and usability were collected from adolescents and their parent or legal guardian. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 13 PCPs from 11 PBRN clinics to identify facilitators and barriers to incorporating mental health apps in treatment planning for adolescents with depression and anxiety. RESULTS: The pilot randomized 18 participants to the app (n=10, 56%) or to a wait list control condition (n=8, 44%); 17 participants were included in the analysis, and 1 became ineligible upon chart review due to lack of eligibility based on documented diagnosis. The overall sample was predominantly female (15/17, 88%), White (15/17, 88%), and privately insured (15/17, 88%). Mean PHQ-9 scores at 4 weeks decreased by 3.3 points in the active treatment group (representing a shift in mean depression score from moderate to mild symptom severity categories) and 2 points in the wait list control group (no shift in symptom severity category). Teen- and parent-reported usability, feasibility, and acceptability of the app was high. PCPs reported preference for introducing mHealth interventions like the one in this study early in the course of care for individuals presenting with mild or moderate symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: In this small study, we demonstrated the feasibility, acceptability, usability, and safety of using a CBT-based chatbot for adolescents presenting with moderate depressive symptoms in a network of PBRN-based primary care clinics. This pilot study could not establish effectiveness, but our results suggest that further study in a larger pediatric population is warranted. Future study inclusive of rural, socioeconomically disadvantaged, and underrepresented communities is needed to establish generalizability of effectiveness and identify implementation-related adaptations needed to promote broader uptake in pediatric primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04603053; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04603053.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.766

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.209
GPT teacher head0.532
Teacher spread0.323 · 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