MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362696605 · doi:10.1038/s41537-023-00352-1

Digital health innovation to prevent relapse and support recovery in young people with first-episode psychosis: A pilot study of Horyzons-Canada

2023· article· en· W4362696605 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSchizophrenia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Health and Medical Research CouncilCanada Research ChairsMedical Research CouncilBrain and Behavior Research Foundation
KeywordsPsychosocialPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)ModerationPeer supportDigital healthMental healthSocial supportPsychologyScale (ratio)MedicineClinical psychologyPsychiatryHealth carePsychotherapistSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Digital health innovations may help to improve access to psychosocial therapy and peer support; however, the existence of evidence-based digital health interventions for individuals recovering from a first-episode psychosis (FEP) remains limited. This study aims to investigate the feasibility, acceptability, safety, and pre-post outcomes of Horyzons-Canada (HoryzonsCa), a Canadian adaptation of a digital mental health intervention consisting of psychosocial interventions, online social networking, and clinical and peer support moderation. Using a convergent mixed-methods research design, we recruited participants from a specialized early intervention clinic for FEP in Montreal, Canada. Twenty-three participants (mean age = 26.8) completed baseline assessments, and 20 completed follow-up assessments after 8 weeks of intervention access. Most participants provided positive feedback on general experience (85%, 17/20) and the utility of Horyzons for identifying their strengths (70%, 14/20). Almost all perceived the platform as easy to use (95%, 19/20) and felt safe using it (90%, 18/20). There were no adverse events related to the intervention. Participants used HoryzonsCa to learn about their illness and how to get better (65%, 13/20), receive support (60%, 12/20), and access social networking (35%, 7/20) and peer support (30%, 6/20). Regarding adoption, 65% (13/20) logged in at least 4 times over 8 weeks. There was a nonsignificant increase in social functioning and no deterioration on the Clinical Global Impression Scale. Overall, HoryzonsCa was feasible to implement and perceived as safe and acceptable. More research is needed with larger sample sizes and using in-depth qualitative methods to better understand the implementation and impact of HoryzonsCa.

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)0.000
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 score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score0.854

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.295 · 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