MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396557667 · doi:10.1177/20552076241248296

Acceptability, usability, and credibility of a mindfulness-based digital therapeutic for pediatric concussion: A mixed-method study

2024· article· en· W4396557667 on OpenAlexafffund
Veronik Sicard, Kiarah M K O'Kane, Olivier Brown, Lauren Butterfield, Rachel Kardish, Esther Choi, Katherine Healey, Noah D. Silverberg, Andra Smith, Gary S. Goldfield, Bechara J. Saab, Clare Gray, Kristian Goulet, Peter J. Anderson, Craig Mackie, Sonja Roth, Martin H. Osmond, Roger Zemek, Molly Cairncross, Andrée‐Anne Ledoux

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of OttawaVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteUniversity of British ColumbiaChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
FundersCHEO Research InstituteUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsUsabilityCredibilityMindfulnessConcussionPsychologyApplied psychologyComputer scienceMedicineClinical psychologyInjury preventionPoison controlHuman–computer interactionMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The ability to cope with concussion symptoms and manage stress is an important determinant of risk for prolonged symptoms. Objective: This open-label mixed-methods pilot study assessed the acceptability and credibility of a mindfulness-based intervention delivered through a digital therapeutic (DTx; therapeutic smartphone app) for pediatric concussion. Methods: Participants aged 12 to 18 years were recruited from an emergency department within 48 hours of a concussion (acute cohort) or from a tertiary care clinic at least 1-month post-concussion (persisting symptoms cohort). Participants completed a novel 4-week mindfulness-based intervention, for 10 to 15 minutes/day, at a minimum of 4 days/week. At 2 weeks, participants completed a credibility and expectancy questionnaire. At 4 weeks, participants completed questionnaires assessing satisfaction, usability and working alliance, as well as a semi-structured phone interview. Results: Ten participants completed the study outcomes (7 acute; 3 persisting symptoms). The intervention was perceived as credible (median/max possible = 6.50/9.00 [6.83,8.75]) and DTx was usable (median/max possible = 70.00/100.00 [55.00,82.50]). Participants rated their satisfaction with the DTx (median/max possible = 27.00/32.00 [24.50,29.50]) and the working alliance with the digital mindfulness guides (median/max possible = 3.92/5.00 [3.38-4.33]) as high. Four themes were identified from the qualitative data: (a) positive attributes; (b) negative attributes; (c) ideas for modifications; and (d) technical issues. Conclusion: Results show modifications to the DTx, instructions and mindfulness intervention, and potential ways to increase adherence by leveraging positive attributes. A randomized control trial will assess the effectiveness of the DTx MBI to decrease the risk of persisting symptoms and reduce the symptom burden following pediatric concussion.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.361 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital HealthSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207