MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393210206 · doi:10.32872/cpe.10881

Feasibility and acceptability of a mobile app for prolonged grief disorder symptoms

2024· article· en· W4393210206 on OpenAlexaff
Anaïs Aeschlimann, Nicolas Gordillo, Taro Ueno, Andreas Maercker, Clare Killikelly

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Psychology in Europe · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversität Zürich
KeywordsGriefMobile appsPsychologyPsychotherapistClinical psychologyComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Mobile apps provide a unique platform for mental health assessment and monitoring. They can provide real time, accessible data on symptoms of mental disorders that may yield rich data for detailed clinical assessment and help individuals gain insight into their current mental state. We developed one of the first apps for tracking symptoms of prolonged grief disorder. Method: In this pilot feasibility study, we assess the feasibility and acceptability of a new mobile app mGAGE for use once a day for 3 weeks. 27 participants completed mental health assessments at t1 and t2. Results: Adherence to the app protocol was very high with 100% for the first two weeks of use. A surprising finding was the improvement of grief symptoms at t2. Debriefing interviews revealed general qualitative categories including positive feedback, negative feedback and specific recommendations. Overall, the app was found to be feasible for use for the first two weeks and acceptable for bereaved individuals. Conclusions: This app could provide valuable data for in depth clinical assessment, may support individuals to gain greater insight into their symptoms and may have a therapeutic effect in terms of improved grief symptoms. Implications for future studies including use in larger intervention studies are discussed.

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.871

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.506
Teacher spread0.384 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Psychology in EuropeSame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207