MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4360585688 · doi:10.2196/43780

The Impact of a Messenger-Based Psychosocial Chat Counseling Service on Further Help-Seeking Among Children and Young Adults: Longitudinal Study

2023· article· en· W4360585688 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sabrina Baldofski, Elisabeth Kohls, Zeki Efe, Melanie Eckert, Shadi Saee, Julia Thomas, Richard Wundrack, Christine Rummel‐Kluge

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Mental Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversität LeipzigBundesministerium für Gesundheit
KeywordsPsychosocialPsychologyClinical psychologyLongitudinal studyDevelopmental psychologyMedicinePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mental crises have high prevalences in adolescence. Early interventions appear to be highly important to diminish the risk of the deterioration, recurrence, or chronification of symptoms. In recent years, various providers have started offering live chat support in psychological crises. The messenger-based psychological counseling service krisenchat aims to support young people in crises and, if necessary, provide a recommendation for a referral to the health care system or to seek further help from a trusted adult person. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the impact of using the counseling service of krisenchat on the further help-seeking behavior of young people, and to identify associated factors of further help-seeking. METHODS: This longitudinal study analyzed anonymous data from 247 individuals who used krisenchat between October 2021 and March 2022, and received a recommendation for further help-seeking. An online survey directly after the chat assessed the perceived helpfulness of the chat and well-being after the chat. After 4 weeks, further help-seeking, facilitators and barriers to help-seeking, and self-efficacy were assessed in an online follow-up survey. RESULTS: The most frequently recommended services or persons to seek further help from included a psychotherapist or social psychiatric service (75/225, 33.3%), a school psychologist or school social worker (52/225, 23.1%), and the user's parents (45/225, 20.0%). Of the 247 users, 120 (48.6%) indicated that they contacted the recommended service or person, and of these, 87 (72.5%) stated that they already had an appointment (or talk) with the respective service or person or that an appointment (or talk) was scheduled. The most frequently reported facilitators for further help-seeking were mental health literacy (54/120, 45.0%), improvement of self-efficacy (55/120, 45.8%), and symptom recognition (40/120, 33.3%). In users not displaying further help-seeking behavior, the most frequent barriers included stigmatization (60/127, 47.2%), lack of mental health literacy (59/127, 46.5%), need for self-reliance and autonomy (53/127, 41.7%), and negative family beliefs regarding help services (53/127, 41.7%). Subgroup comparisons indicated significantly higher levels of self-efficacy in users displaying further help-seeking behavior than in those not displaying further help-seeking behavior. Both subgroups did not differ in gender, age, recommended service or person, chat topics, perceived helpfulness, and well-being. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study indicate that children and young adults receiving counseling on krisenchat benefit in terms of seeking further help. Further help-seeking seems to be associated with higher levels of self-efficacy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien DRKS00026671; https://tinyurl.com/4fm5xe68.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.386 · 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

Citations23
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Mental HealthSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207