MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388467235 · doi:10.2196/52197

Predictors of Use and Drop Out From a Web-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Program and Health Community for Depression and Anxiety in Primary Care Patients: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial

2023· article· en· W4388467235 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Armando J. Rotondi, Bea Herbeck Belnap, Scott D. Rothenberger, Robert Feldman, Barbara H. Hanusa, Bruce L. Rollman

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Mental Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsCognitive behavioral therapyMedicineAnxietyPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)Depression (economics)Mental healthRandomized controlled trialDiscontinuationClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A previously reported study examined the treatment of primary care patients with at least moderate severity depressive or anxiety symptoms via an evidence-based computerized cognitive behavioral therapy (CCBT) program (Beating the Blues) and an online health community (OHC) that included a moderated internet support group. The 2 treatment arms proved to be equally successful at 6-month follow-up. OBJECTIVE: Although highly promising, e-mental health treatment programs have encountered high rates of noninitiation, poor adherence, and discontinuation. Identifying ways to counter these tendencies is critical for their success. To further explore these issues, this study identified the primary care patient characteristics that increased the chances patients would not initiate the use of an intervention, (ie, not try it even once), initiate use, and go on to discontinue or continue to use an intervention. METHODS: The study had 3 arms: one received access to CCBT (n=301); another received CCBT plus OHC (n=302), which included a moderated internet support group; and the third received usual care (n=101). Participants in the 2 active intervention arms of the study were grouped together for analyses of CCBT use (n=603) because both arms had access to CCBT, and there were no differences in outcomes between the 2 arms. Analyses of OHC use were based on 302 participants who were randomized to that arm. RESULTS: Several baseline patient characteristics were associated with failure to initiate the use of CCBT, including having worse physical health (measured by the Short Form Health Survey Physical Components Score, P=.01), more interference from pain (by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Interference score, P=.048), less formal education (P=.02), and being African American or another US minority group (P=.006). Characteristics associated with failure to initiate use of the OHC were better mental health (by the Short Form Health Survey Mental Components Score, P=.04), lower use of the internet (P=.005), and less formal education (P=.001). Those who initiated the use of the CCBT program but went on to complete less of the program had less formal education (P=.01) and lower severity of anxiety symptoms (P=.03). CONCLUSIONS: This study found that several patient characteristics predicted whether a patient was likely to not initiate use or discontinue the use of CCBT or OHC. These findings have clear implications for actionable areas that can be targeted during initial and ongoing engagement activities designed to increase patient buy-in, as well as increase subsequent use and the resulting success of eHealth programs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01482806; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT01482806.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.011
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.379 · 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
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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Mental HealthSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207