Role of Tailored Timing and Frequency Prompts on the Efficacy of an Internet-Delivered Stress Recovery Intervention for Health Care Workers: Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prompts offer a promising strategy to promote client engagement in internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy (ICBT). However, if the prompts do not meet the needs of clients, they can potentially be more obtrusive rather than helpful. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to test if prompts tailored based on timing and frequency, aligned with preintervention goal setting, can increase usage and the efficacy of a therapist-supported ICBT stress recovery intervention for health care workers. METHODS: The 2-arm randomized controlled trial included 87 health care workers (99% female, aged 19-68 years: mean 39.61, SD 11.49): 43 in the standard intervention group and 44 in the tailored prompts group. The primary outcome measure was the Recovery Experiences Questionnaire, and the secondary outcomes were the Perceived Stress Scale-4, the Patient Health Questionnaire-4, and the World Health Organization-5 Well-Being Index. The self-report data were collected before the intervention (September 2022), postintervention (October 2022), and 6-month follow-up (May 2023). RESULTS: =1.1; P=.57). Similarly, tailored prompts did not increase the effects of the intervention in terms of stress recovery skills (Cohen d ranging from 0.31 to 0.85), perceived stress (d=-0.08; -0.70), depression (d=-0.11; -0.38), anxiety (d=-0.32; -0.64), or psychological well-being (d=0.26; 0.46). In addition, the standard intervention group showed greater long-term stress recovery effects than the group using the internet-delivered intervention supplemented by tailored prompts (β=-0.24, P=.03). CONCLUSIONS: Although the study confirmed the efficacy of the program, the merits of tailored prompts in ICBT for stress recovery were not supported. Future research is needed to test the effects of the stress recovery intervention supplemented by goal setting and tailored prompts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05553210; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05553210.
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 | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".