Co-Design of an Escape Room for e-Mental Health Training of Mental Health Care Professionals: Research Through Design Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many efforts to increase the uptake of e-mental health (eMH) have failed due to a lack of knowledge and skills, particularly among professionals. To train health care professionals in technology, serious gaming concepts such as educational escape rooms are increasingly used, which could also possibly be used in mental health care. However, such serious-game concepts are scarcely available for eMH training for mental health care professionals. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to co-design an escape room for training mental health care professionals' eMH skills and test the escape room's usability by exploring their experiences with this concept as a training method. METHODS: This project used a research through design approach with 3 design stages. In the first stage, the purpose, expectations, and storylines for the escape room were formulated in 2 co-design sessions with mental health care professionals, game designers, innovation staff, and researchers. In the second stage, the results were translated into the first escape room, which was tested in 3 sessions, including one web version of the escape room. In the third stage, the escape room was tested with mental health care professionals outside the co-design team. First, 2 test sessions took place, followed by 3 field study sessions. In the field study sessions, a questionnaire was used in combination with focus groups to assess the usability of the escape room for eMH training in practice. RESULTS: An escape room prototype was iteratively developed and tested by the co-design team, which delivered multiple suggestions for adaptations that were assimilated in each next version of the prototype. The field study showed that the escape room creates a positive mindset toward eMH. The suitability of the escape room to explore the possibilities of eMH was rated 4.7 out of 5 by the professionals who participated in the field study. In addition, it was found to be fun and educational at the same time, scoring 4.7 (SD 0.68) on a 5-point scale. Attention should be paid to the game's complexity, credibility, and flexibility. This is important for the usefulness of the escape room in clinical practice, which was rated an average of 3.8 (SD 0.77) on a 5-point scale. Finally, implementation challenges should be addressed, including organizational policy and stimulation of eMH training. CONCLUSIONS: We can conclude that the perceived usability of an escape room for training mental health care professionals in eMH skills is promising. However, it requires additional effort to transfer the learnings into mental health care professionals' clinical practice. A straightforward implementation plan and testing the effectiveness of an escape room on skill enhancement in mental health care professionals are essential next steps to reach sustainable goals.
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 | 0.031 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".