MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396522489 · doi:10.2196/56118

Motivational Variables as Moderating Effects of a Web-Based Mental Health Program for University Students: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial

2024· article· en· W4396522489 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maria Hanano, Leslie Rith‐Najarian, Elizabeth Gong-Guy, Denise A. Chavira

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPsychologyRandomized controlled trialModerationApplied psychologyMedical educationMedicineSocial psychologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Self-guided web-based interventions have the potential of addressing help-seeking barriers and symptoms common among university students, such as depression and anxiety. Unfortunately, self-guided interventions are also associated with less adherence, implicating motivation as a potential moderator for adherence and improvement for such interventions. Previous studies examining motivation as a moderator or predictor of improvement on web-based interventions have defined and measured motivation variably, producing conflicting results. OBJECTIVE: This secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial aimed to examine constructs of motivation as moderators of improvement for a self-guided 8-week web-based intervention in university students (N=1607). METHODS: Tested moderators included internal motivation, external motivation, and confidence in treatment derived from the Treatment Motivation Questionnaire. The primary outcome was an improvement in depression and anxiety measured by the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21. RESULTS: =1.44; P=.15). In this sample, only internal motivation was positively correlated with service initiation, intervention adherence, and intervention satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of a web-based intervention and high or moderate internal motivation resulted in greater improvement in the total Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21 score. These findings highlight the importance of conceptually differentiating motivation-related constructs when examining moderators of improvement. The results suggest that the combination of a web-based intervention and high or moderate internal motivation results in greater improvement. These findings highlight the importance of conceptually differentiating motivation-related constructs when examining moderators of improvement. To better understand the moderating role of internal motivation, future research is encouraged to replicate these findings in diverse samples as well as to examine related constructs such as baseline severity and adherence. Understanding these characteristics informs treatment strategies to maximize adherence and improvement when developing web-based interventions as well as allows services to be targeted to individuals likely to benefit from such interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04361045; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04361045.

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)0.017
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.010
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.487
Teacher spread0.449 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicDigital Mental Health Interventions→French-language works237,207→