MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396954356 · doi:10.2196/50098

A Digital Behavioral Activation Intervention (JuNEX) for Pregnant Women With Subclinical Depression Symptoms: Explorative Co-Design Study

2024· article· en· W4396954356 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elisa Mancinelli, Silvia Gabrielli, Silvia Salcuni

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Human Factors · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionSubclinical infectionUsabilityClinical psychologyIntervention (counseling)Behavioral activationMedicineDepression (economics)PsychosocialPsychologyPsychiatryComputer scienceCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Digital interventions are gaining increasing interest due to their structured nature, ready availability, and self-administered capabilities. Perinatal women have expressed a desire for such interventions. In this regard, behavioral activation interventions may be particularly suitable for digital administration. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to exploratorily investigate and compare the feasibility of the internet-based self-help guided versus unguided version of the Brief Behavioral Activation Treatment for Depression-Revised, an empirically supported in-person behavioral activation protocol, targeting pregnant women with subclinical depression symptoms. A user-centered design is used, whereby data are collected with the intent of evaluating how to adjust the intervention in line with pregnant women's needs. Usability and user engagement were evaluated. METHODS: A total of 11 Italian pregnant women with subclinical depressive symptoms based on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (scoring<15) participated in this study; of them, 6 (55%) women were randomly assigned to the guided group (age: mean 32.17, SD 4.36 years) and 5 (45%) to the unguided group (age: mean 31, SD 4.95 years). The Moodle platform was used to deliver the interventions in an e-learning format. It consisted of 6 core modules and 3 optional modules; the latter aimed at revising the content of the former. In the guided group, each woman had weekly chats with their assigned human guide to support them in the homework revisions. The intervention content included text, pictures, and videos. Semistructured interviews were conducted, and descriptive statistics were analyzed. RESULTS: Collectively, the data suggest that the guided intervention was better accepted than the unguided one. However, the high rates of dropout (at T6: guided group: 3/6, 50%; unguided: 4/5, 80%) suggest that a digital replica of Behavioral Activation Treatment for Depression-Revised may not be feasible in an e-learning format. The reduced usability of the platform used was reported, and homework was perceived as too time-consuming and effort-intensive. Moreover, the 6 core modules were deemed sufficient for the intervention's goals, suggesting that the 3 optional modules could be eliminated. Nevertheless, participants from both groups expressed satisfaction with the content and found it relevant to their pregnancy experiences. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the findings have emphasized both the intervention's merits and shortcomings. Results highlight the unsuitability of replicating an in-person protocol digitally as well as of the use of nonprofessional tools for the implementation of self-help interventions, ultimately making the intervention not feasible. Pregnant women have nonetheless expressed a desire to receive psychological support and commented on the possibilities of digital psychosocial supports, particularly those that are app-based. The information collected and the issues identified here are important to guide the development and co-design of a more refined platform for the intervention deployment and to tailor the intervention's content to pregnant women's needs.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Human FactorsSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207