MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322098211 · doi:10.2196/37727

A Mobile Self-control Training App to Improve Self-control and Physical Activity in People With Severe Mental Illness: Protocol for 2 Single-Case Experimental Designs

2023· article· en· W4322098211 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tessa Dekkers, Tahnee Heirbaut, Stephanie E Schouten, Saskia M. Kelders, Nienke Beerlage-de Jong, Geke Ludden, Jeroen Deenik, Yvonne H. A. Bouman, Hanneke Kip

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersZonMw
KeywordsPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)PsychologyPopulationMental healthMedicineProtocol (science)Mental illnessCognitionPhysical therapyClinical psychologyPsychiatryAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Lack of physical activity is a common issue with detrimental consequences for the health of people with severe mental illness (SMI). Existing physical activity interventions show suboptimal effects as they require substantial cognitive skills, including goal setting and writing, whereas cognitive deficits are common in this population. To bolster the effectiveness of physical activity interventions, self-control training (SCT), in which users practice the ability to override unwanted thoughts and behaviors, can be used in addition. Recent research has demonstrated the initial effectiveness of a mobile SCT app, but this has not been studied in psychiatric clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate to what extent adding a mobile SCT app designed for and with people with SMI to a mobile lifestyle intervention aimed at increasing physical activity increases physical activity and self-control levels. METHODS: A mixed methods approach incorporating 2 single-case experimental designs (SCEDs) and qualitative interviews was used to evaluate and optimize SCT. Overall, 12 participants with SMI will be recruited from 2 organizations offering outpatient and inpatient care to people with SMI. Each experiment will include 6 patients. SCED I is a concurrent multiple-baseline design across participants that explores initial effectiveness and optimal intervention duration. Using accelerometry and experience sampling questionnaires, participants' physical activity and self-control will be monitored for ≥5 days from baseline, followed by the sequential introduction of Google Fit, the physical activity intervention, for 7 days and the addition of SCIPP: Self-Control Intervention App for 28 days. SCED II is an introduction/withdrawal design in which optimized SCT will be introduced and withdrawn to validate the findings from SCED I. In both experiments, the daily average of total activity counts per hour and the state level of self-control will serve as the primary and secondary outcome measures. Data will be analyzed using visual analysis and piecewise linear regression models. RESULTS: The study was designated as not subject to the Dutch Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act by the Medical Research Ethical Committee Oost-Nederland and approved by the Ethics Committee/domain Humanities and Social Sciences of the Faculty of Behavioural, Management, and Social Sciences at the University of Twente. Participant recruitment started in January 2022, and we expect to publish the results in early 2023. CONCLUSIONS: The mobile SCT app is expected to be feasible and effective. It is self-paced and scalable and can increase patient motivation, making it a suitable intervention for people with SMI. SCED is a relatively novel yet promising method for gaining insights into whether and how mobile apps work that can handle heterogeneous samples and makes it possible to involve a diverse population with SMI without having to include a large number of participants. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/37727.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0480.008

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 head0.285
GPT teacher head0.559
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicBehavioral Health and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207