Mobile Acceptance and Commitment Therapy With Distressed First-Generation College Students: Microrandomized Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Extant gaps in mental health services are intensified among first-generation college students. Improving access to empirically based interventions is critical, and mobile health (mHealth) interventions are growing in support. Acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) is an empirically supported intervention that has been applied to college students, via mobile app, and in brief intervals. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the safety, feasibility, and effectiveness of an ACT-based mHealth intervention using a microrandomized trial (MRT) design. METHODS: Participants (N=34) were 18- to 19-year-old first-generation college students reporting distress, who participated in a 6-week intervention period of twice-daily assessments and randomization to intervention. Participants logged symptoms, moods, and behaviors on the mobile app Lorevimo. After the assessment, participants were randomized to an ACT-based intervention or no intervention. Analyses examined proximal change after randomization using a weighted and centered least squares approach. Outcomes included values-based and avoidance behavior, as well as depressive symptoms and perceived stress. RESULTS: The findings indicated the intervention was safe and feasible. The intervention increased values-based behavior but did not decrease avoidance behavior. The intervention reduced depressive symptoms but not perceived stress. CONCLUSIONS: An MRT of an mHealth ACT-based intervention among distressed first-generation college students suggests that a larger MRT is warranted. Future investigations may tailor interventions to contexts where intervention is most impactful. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04081662; https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT04081662. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/17086.
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 | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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.
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".