MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403915078 · doi:10.1101/2024.10.28.24315453

Preliminary Findings from an Augmented Reality (AR) App Delivering Recovery-Oriented Cognitive Therapy for Negative Symptoms in Schizophrenia

2024· preprint· en· W4403915078 on OpenAlexaff
Sunny X. Tang, Moein Foroughi, Aaron P. Brinen, Michael L. Birnbaum, Sarah Berretta, Leily Behbehani, John M. Kane

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Augmented realityCognitionPsychotherapistPsychologyNegative symptomReality therapyClinical psychologyPsychosisHuman–computer interactionComputer sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Negative symptoms are a primary driver of poor outcomes in schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD), but there are no FDA-approved medications or FDA-cleared therapeutics targeting negative symptoms in schizophrenia. NST-SPARK is a novel digital therapeutic targeting negative symptoms in SSD. It is a smartphone application delivering recovery-oriented cognitive therapy (CT-R), via gamified augmented reality (AR) experiences, to provide experiential learning aimed at dismantling maladaptive beliefs. In this study, we assessed a prototype (NST-SPARK v.1.5) in 20 participants with SSD and clinically significant negative symptoms. NST-SPARK v.1.5 delivers a single therapeutic module over a 1-week period. The primary objective was to determine the acceptability and feasibility of this approach. Secondary objectives were to generate descriptive findings for changes in defeatist beliefs, self-esteem, and attitudes toward goal-oriented activities. Methods Recruitment and all study procedures were completed online. Twenty participants with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were enrolled, with a range of demographic and socioeconomic status and treatment settings. Participants completed self-reports on the acceptability and feasibility of NST-SPARK v.1.5 and provided open-ended feedback through a semi-structured interview. Self-report scales on defeatist beliefs, self-esteem, and attitudes toward goal-oriented activities were completed before and after participants were introduced to NST-SPARK, and then again at a 1-week follow-up. Results In general, participants found NST-SPARK v.1.5 to be feasible and acceptable, responding with an average response of “Agree”, indicating that the intervention was found to meet with the participants’ approval and seemed implementable. Almost all participants (19 of 20) used the app on their own prior to the 1-week follow up despite not being incentivized to do so. In addition, participants responded to open-ended feedback questions in a generally positive way. We also observed shifts in defeatist beliefs (Cohen’s d = 0.12), self-esteem (Cohen’s d = -0.21), and attitudes toward goal attainment consistent (intention: Cohen’s d = 0.13; confidence: Cohen’s d = 0.35) with intended improvements in these targeted areas. Participants were able to make substantive progress toward identified goals in 90% of cases. Conclusions This preliminary, single-arm, unblinded study of a single-module prototype for NST-SPARK found that the approach is generally acceptable and feasible for people with SSD and negative symptoms. Engagement of the intended target of defeatist beliefs was supported by our findings but require confirmation in future randomized controlled trials. Overall, NST-SPARK is based on a promising approach and further development is warranted.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicDigital Mental Health Interventions→French-language works237,207→