MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4362571765 · doi:10.2196/43987

Evaluating the Feasibility of a Multiplayer Role-Playing Game as a Behavioral Health Intervention in Adolescent Patients With Chronic Physical or Mental Conditions: Protocol for a Cohort Study

2023· article· en· W4362571765 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dmitriy Babichenko, Ana Radović, Ravi Patel, Alexis Hester, Koehler Powell, Nicholas Eggers, David Happe

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthUniversity of Pittsburgh
KeywordsAnxietyPsychological interventionMental healthPsychologyIntervention (counseling)Applied psychologyClinical psychologyDepression (economics)Session (web analytics)PsychiatryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have revealed that adolescents with chronic physical or mental conditions (CPMCs) are at an increased risk for depression and anxiety, with serious direct and indirect negative effects on treatment adherence, family functioning, and health-related quality of life. As game-based approaches are effective interventions in treating anxiety and depression, we propose to explore the use of a multiplayer role-playing game (RPG) as a potential intervention for social isolation, anxiety, and depression. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to (1) determine the feasibility of using Masks, a multiplayer RPG, as an intervention for social isolation, anxiety, and depression in adolescents with CPMCs; (2) evaluate the viability of the research process; and (3) gauge participation in and engagement with RPG-based interventions. METHODS: This study is a remote synchronous game-based intervention for adolescents with CPMCs aged 14-19 years. Eligible participants completed a web-based baseline survey to assess anxiety, depression, and social isolation and to identify their gaming habits. After completing the baseline survey, they participated in 5 moderated Masks game sessions. In Masks, players assume the roles of young superheroes; select their character types, superpowers; and perform actions determined by the game's rule system and dice rolls. All game sessions were played using Discord, a communication platform commonly used by gaming communities. Games were led and moderated by game masters (GMs). After each game session, participants completed surveys to assess changes in anxiety, depression, and social isolation, and their attitude toward the game and the user experience. The participants also completed an exit survey after all 5 game sessions (modified version of the Patient Health Questionnaire and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire, and 17 open-ended questions). The GMs rated each game session and reported on gameplay, player behavior, comfort, and engagement levels of the players. RESULTS: As of March 2020, six participants were recruited for the pilot study to participate in moderated web-based game sessions of Masks; 3 completed all game sessions and all required assessments. Although the number of participants was too low to draw generalizable conclusions, self-reported clinical outcomes did seem to indicate a positive change in depression, anxiety, and social isolation symptoms. Qualitative analysis of postgame survey data from participants and GMs indicated high levels of engagement and enjoyment. Furthermore, the participants provided feedback about improved mood and engagement related to weekly participation in Masks. Lastly, responses to the exit survey showed interest in future RPG-related studies. CONCLUSIONS: We established a workflow for gameplay and evaluated a research protocol for evaluating the impact of RPG participation on isolation, anxiety, and depression symptoms in adolescents with CPMCs. Preliminary data collected from the pilot study support the validity of the research protocol and the use of RPG-based interventions in larger clinical studies. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/43987.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.005

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 head0.590
GPT teacher head0.719
Teacher spread0.129 · 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
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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicDigital Mental Health Interventions→French-language works237,207→