MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4385640550 · doi:10.2196/46757

Development and Implementation of DIALOG+S in the School Setting as a Tool for Promoting Adolescent Mental Well-Being and Resilience in a Post–Armed Conflict Area in Colombia: Exploratory Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

2023· article· en· W4385640550 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carlos Gómez–Restrepo, María José Sarmiento-Suárez, Magda Alba-Saavedra, María Gabriela Calvo-Valderrama, Carlos Rincón, Victoria Bird, Stefan Priebe, Francois van Loggerenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEconomic and Social Research CouncilMinistério da Ciência, Tecnologia e InovaçãoBarts Charity
KeywordsMental healthPsychological interventionPsychologyPsychological resilienceCluster randomised controlled trialPopulationIntervention (counseling)Randomized controlled trialDialog boxQuality of life (healthcare)Medical educationApplied psychologyClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatrySocial psychologyPsychotherapistEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Educational settings are ideal for promoting mental well-being and resilience in children. The challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic made evident the important role that teachers and school counselors play in the mental health of their students. Therefore, it is imperative to develop and implement cost-effective interventions that allow them to identify and address mental health problems early, especially in post-armed conflict areas, to reduce the burden of mental disorders in this population. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to adapt an existing patient-focused digital intervention called DIALOG+ from an adult clinical setting to an adolescent educational setting and to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and estimated effect of implementing this intervention as a tool for promoting quality of life, mental well-being, and resilience. METHODS: We conducted an exploratory mixed methods study in 2 public schools in postconflict areas in Tolima, Colombia. This study was conducted in 3 phases. In the adaptation phase, focus groups were conducted with students and teachers to identify changes required in DIALOG+ for it to be used in the school setting. The exploration phase consisted of an exploratory cluster randomized controlled trial. A total of 14 clusters, each with 1 teacher and 5 students, were randomly allocated to either the experimental (DIALOG+S) group or to an active control group (counseling as usual). Teachers in both groups delivered the intervention once a month for 6 months. Through screening scales, information was collected on mental health symptoms, quality of life, self-esteem, resilience, and family functionality before and after the intervention. Finally, the consolidation phase explored the experiences of teachers and students with DIALOG+S using focus group discussions. RESULTS: The changes suggested by participants in the adaptation phase highlighted the central importance of the school setting in the mental health of adolescents. In the exploratory phase, 70 participants with a mean age of 14.69 (SD 2.13) years were included. Changes observed in the screening scale scores of the intervention group suggest that the DIALOG+S intervention has the potential to improve aspects of mental health, especially quality of life, resilience, and emotional symptoms. The consolidation phase showed that stakeholders felt that using this intervention in the school setting was feasible, acceptable, and an enriching experience that generated changes in the perceived mental health and behavior of participants. CONCLUSIONS: Our results are encouraging and show that the DIALOG+S intervention is feasible and acceptable as a promising opportunity to promote well-being and prevent and identify mental health problems in the school context in a postconflict area in Colombia. Larger, fully powered studies are warranted to properly assess the efficacy and potential impact of the intervention and to refine implementation plans. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) registry ISRCTN14396374; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN14396374. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/40286.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.408 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicCOVID-19 and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→