MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389129455 · doi:10.2196/47504

Learnings From Implementation of Technology-Enabled Mental Health Interventions in India: Implementation Report

2023· article· en· W4389129455 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sudha Kallakuri, Sridevi Gara, Mahesh Godi, Sandhya Kanaka Yatirajula, Srilatha Paslawar, Mercian Daniel, David Peiris, Pallab K Maulik

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilIndian Council of Medical ResearchUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsMental healthPsychological interventionmHealthComputer scienceMedicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Recent years have witnessed an increase in the use of technology-enabled interventions for delivering mental health care in different settings. Technological solutions have been advocated to increase access to care, especially in primary health care settings in low- and middle-income countries, to facilitate task-sharing given the lack of trained mental health professionals. OBJECTIVE: This report describes the experiences and challenges faced during the development and implementation of technology-enabled interventions for mental health among adults and adolescents in rural and urban settings of India. METHODS: A detailed overview of the technological frameworks used in various studies, including the Systematic Medical Appraisal and Referral Treatment (SMART) Mental Health pilot study, SMART Mental Health cluster randomized controlled trial, and Adolescents' Resilience and Treatment Needs for Mental Health in Indian Slums (ARTEMIS) study, is provided. This includes the mobile apps that were used to collect data and the use of the database to store the data that were collected. Based on the experiences faced, the technological enhancements and adaptations made at the mobile app and database levels are described in detail. IMPLEMENTATION (RESULTS): Development of descriptive analytics at the database level; enabling offline and online data storage modalities; customizing the Open Medical Record System platform to suit the study requirements; modifying the encryption settings, thereby making the system more secure; and merging different apps for simultaneous data collection were some of the enhancements made across different projects. CONCLUSIONS: Technology-enabled interventions prove to be a useful solution to cater to large populations in low-resource settings. The development of mobile apps is subject to the context and the area where they would be implemented. This paper outlines the need for careful testing using an iterative process that may support future research using similar technology. TRIAL REGISTRATION: SMART Mental Health trial: Clinical Trial Registry India CTRI/2018/08/015355; https://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/pmaindet2.php?EncHid=MjMyNTQ=&Enc=&userName=CTRI/2018/08/015355. ARTEMIS trial: Clinical Trial Registry India CTRI/2022/02/040307; https://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/pmaindet2.php?EncHid=NDcxMTE=&Enc=&userName=CTRI/2022/02/040307.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.440 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207