Preferences for Text Messaging Supports During Youth Transition to Adult Mental Health Services: Theory-Informed Modified e-Delphi Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: For many young people, the transition from child to adult mental health services is a vulnerable time associated with treatment disengagement and illness progression. Providing service information and options to youth, appealing to them, and tailoring to their needs during this period could help overcome systematic barriers to a successful transition. We know little about how SMS text message-based interventions might be leveraged to support the motivational, informational, and behavioral needs of youth during this time. Ascertaining youth preferences for the content and functionality of an SMS text message service could inform prototype development. OBJECTIVE: This study investigated consensus preferences among youth on important content, technology features, and engagement supports to inform a transition-focused SMS text message service. METHODS: A modified e-Delphi survey design was used to collect demographics, current levels of technology use, importance ratings on message content, preferred technical features, and barriers and enablers to engagement for youth in Canada aged 16-26 years who have accessed mental health services within the past 5 years. Survey items on content were categorized according to the information-motivation-behavioral skills (IMB) model. Survey items on technical features were categorized according to the persuasive system design (PSD) model. A predefined consensus rating matrix and descriptive statistics were used to characterize the sample. The high consensus threshold was 70%. RESULTS: A total of 100 participants, predominantly non-White (n=47, 47%), aged 20-26 years (n=59, 59%), and who had first accessed mental health services between the ages of 13 and 19 years (n=60, 60%), were selected. The majority (n=90, 90%) identified as daily SMS text message users. A high level of consensus on importance ratings was reported in 45% (9/20) of content items based on the IMB model. There were higher levels of consensus on importance ratings related to behavior domain items (3/3, 100%) than information domain items (4/9, 44%) or motivation domain items (2/8, 25%). A high level of consensus on importance ratings was reported in only 19% (4/21) of feature and functionality items based on the PSD model. Among PSD model categories, there was a high level of consensus on importance ratings in 8% (1/12) of the primary task support domain items and 100% (3/3) of the system credibility support domain items. None of the dialogue-support and social-support domain items met the high level of consensus thresholds. In total, 27% (27/100) of youth indicated that the most significant enabler for engaging with a transition-focused SMS text message intervention was the personalization of text messages. CONCLUSIONS: Scientists developing next-generation SMS text messaging interventions for this population need to consider how levels of consensus on different features may impact feasibility and personalization efforts. Youth can (and should) play an integral role in the development of these interventions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".