MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387347490 · doi:10.2196/51461

Potential Implementers’ Perspectives on the Development and Implementation of an e–Mental Health Intervention for Caregivers of Adults With Chronic Kidney Disease: Qualitative Interview Study

2023· article· en· W4387347490 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chelsea Coumoundouros, Rabie Adel El Arab, Paul Farrand, Alexander Hamilton, Robbert Sanderman, Louise von Essén, Joanne Woodford

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Human Factors · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean CommissionVetenskapsrådetNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchMeta
KeywordsImplementation researchMental healthPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)ReferralQualitative researchNursingMedicinePsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: e-Mental health interventions can improve access to mental health support for caregivers of people living with chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, implementation challenges often prevent effective interventions from being put into practice. To develop an e-mental health intervention for caregivers of people living with CKD that is optimized for future implementation, it is important to engage professionals that may endorse or deliver the intervention (ie, potential implementers) during intervention development. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore the perspectives of potential implementers working in kidney care, in mental health care, or at nonprofit organizations regarding the design and implementation of an e-mental health intervention for caregivers of people living with CKD. METHODS: Potential implementers (N=18) were recruited via National Health Service Trusts, email, and social media advertisements to participate in semistructured video interviews. Interview questions were informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Data were analyzed using a deductive analysis approach using the CFIR, with inductive coding applied to relevant data not captured by the framework. RESULTS: A total of 29 generic categories, related to 17 CFIR constructs, were identified. The perceived fit between the intervention and implementation context (ie, existing service delivery models and work routines) and existing social networks among potential implementers were perceived as important factors in enhancing implementation potential. However, a need for capacity building among potential implementers to create systems to support the identification and referral of caregivers to an e-mental health intervention was identified. Equity concerns were raised regarding the intervention, highlighting the importance of incorporating an equity lens during intervention design to enhance accessibility and adoption. CONCLUSIONS: Potential implementers provided valuable insights into key design and implementation factors to help inform the development of an e-mental health intervention for caregivers of people living with CKD. Incorporating their feedback can help ensure the intervention is acceptable and inform the selection of future implementation strategies to enhance the implementation potential of the intervention. Potential implementers should continue to be engaged throughout intervention development.

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 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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.642

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Human FactorsSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207