Web-Based Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment for Traumatic Stress and Alcohol Misuse Among Survivors of Sexual Assault and Intimate Partner Violence: Usability and Acceptability Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV) and sexual assault (SA) are at a high risk for traumatic stress and alcohol misuse. IPV and SA survivors face barriers to services for traumatic stress and alcohol misuse and have low service utilization rates. One way to increase access to services for this population is the use of web-based screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT), an evidence-informed approach for early identification of traumatic stress and alcohol and drug misuse and connecting individuals to treatment. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the usability and acceptability of a web-based SBIRT called CHAT (Choices For Your Health After Trauma) tailored to address traumatic stress and alcohol misuse following past-year IPV, SA, or both. METHODS: Phase 1 involved gathering feedback about usability and acceptability from focus groups with victim service professionals (22/52, 42%) and interviews with past-year survivors of IPV, SA, or both (13/52, 25%). Phase 2 involved gathering feedback about the acceptability of an adapted version of CHAT in an additional sample of recent survivors (17/52, 33%). Survey data on history of IPV and SA, posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms, alcohol and drug use, and service use were collected from survivors in both phases to characterize the samples. Qualitative content and thematic analyses of the interviews and focus group data were conducted using a coding template analysis comprising 6 a priori themes (usability, visual design, user engagement, content, therapeutic persuasiveness, and therapeutic alliance). RESULTS: Six themes emerged during the focus groups and interviews related to CHAT: usability, visual design, user engagement, content, therapeutic persuasiveness, and therapeutic alliance. Phase 1 providers and survivors viewed CHAT as acceptable, easy to understand, and helpful. Participants reported that the intervention could facilitate higher engagement in this population as the web-based modality is anonymous, easily accessible, and brief. Participants offered helpful suggestions for improving CHAT by updating images, increasing content personalization, reducing text, and making users aware that the intervention is confidential. The recommendations of phase 1 participants were incorporated into CHAT. Phase 2 survivors viewed the revised intervention and found it highly acceptable (mean 4.1 out of 5, SD 1.29). A total of 4 themes encapsulated participant's favorite aspects of CHAT: (1) content and features, (2) accessible and easy to use, (3) education, and (4) personalization. Six survivors denied disliking any aspect. The themes on recommended changes included content and features, brevity, personalization, and language access. Participants provided dissemination recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, CHAT was acceptable among victim service professionals and survivors. Positive reactions to CHAT show promise for future research investigating the efficacy and potential benefit of CHAT when integrated into services for people with traumatic stress and alcohol misuse after recent IPV and SA.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".