MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395078007 · doi:10.2196/51791

A Web-Based and Mobile Intervention Program Using a Spaced Education Approach for Workplace Mental Health Literacy: Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

2024· article· en· W4395078007 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lawrence Lam, Mary Lam

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Mental Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHealth and Medical Research FundFood and Health Bureau
KeywordsmHealthPsychoeducationMental healthRandomized controlled trialPsychologyHealth interventionCluster randomised controlled trialMedical educationApplied psychologyIntervention (counseling)MedicineNursingPsychological interventionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Workplace mental health is an important global health concern. objectives: This unblinded, phase-III, wait-listed cluster randomized controlled trial aimed to examine the effectiveness of a mobile health (mHealth) psychoeducation program using a spaced education approach on mental health literacy (MHL) in the workplace. The main interest of this paper was the immediate and 3-month medium-term effect of the program on the MHL of workers. The purposely built mHealth platform was also evaluated as a health-related app. Methods: The mHealth platform was designed using the principle of spaced education as a psychoeducation intervention program, with various modules of web-based and mobile materials presented to the participant in a progressive manner. Short quizzes at the end of each module ensured adequate learning, and successful completion qualified the learner to progress to the next level. The trial recruited 456 employees of specific industries with high levels of work-related stress. Participants who were nested in different offices or units were allocated into the intervention and wait-listed control groups using a block randomization process, with the office or unit as the cluster. A separate sample of 70 individual raters were used for the evaluation of the mHealth platform. The Australian National MHL and Stigma Survey and the Mobile Apps Rating Scale were completed through a web-based self-reported survey to assess MHL and evaluate the app. The trial and follow-up data were analyzed by a generalized linear latent and mixed model with adjustments for the clustering effect of work sites and repeated measures. Results: Of the 456 participants in the trial, 236 (51.8%) responded to the follow-up survey. Most MHL outcomes obtained significant results immediately after the intervention and across time. After adjusting for the clustering effect, the postintervention weighted mean scores were significantly higher in the intervention group than the control group for correct recognition of a mental health problem, help seeking, and stigmatization by 0.2 (SE 0.1; P=.003), 0.9 (SE 0.2; P<.001), and 1.8 (SE 0.4; P<.001), respectively. After adjusting for the clustering effect, significant differences across time were found in help-seeking intention (P=.01), stigmatization (P<.001), and social distancing (P<.001). The evaluation of the mHealth program resulted in average scores of the 4 major domains ranging from 3.8 to 4.2, with engagement having the lowest score. Conclusions: The mHealth psychoeducation intervention program using this platform had immediate and 3-month medium-term effects of retaining and improving MHL. The platform was evaluated to have satisfactory performance in terms of functionality, aesthetics, information content, and utility in enhancing MHL. It is anticipated that ongoing development in digital health will provide great benefits in improving the mental health of the global population.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.428 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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