MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406237207 · doi:10.2196/64218

Community-Based 4-Level Intervention Targeting Depression and Suicidal Behavior in Europe: Protocol for an Implementation Project

2025· article· en· W4406237207 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Katharina M. Schnitzspahn, Kahar Abdulla, Ella Arensman, Chantal Van Audenhove, Rainer Mere, Víctor Pérez, Merike Sisask, András Székely, Piotr Toczyski, Ulrich Hegerl

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Protocol (science)European unionMental healthPromotion (chess)Depression (economics)Public healthMedicinePsychologyPsychiatryNursingBusinessPolitical scienceAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The community-based, 4-level intervention of the European Alliance Against Depression (EAAD) is simultaneously addressing depression and suicidal behavior. Intervention activities target primary care health professionals (level 1), the general public (level 2), community facilitators (level 3), and patients and their relatives (level 4). Activities comprise the digital iFightDepression tool, a guided self-management tool based on cognitive behavioral therapy. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to present the European Union-cofunded EAAD-Best study protocol, aiming at the implementation, dissemination, and evaluation of the 4-level intervention and the iFightDepression tool in several countries across Europe. METHODS: The 4-level intervention has been implemented for the first time in Bulgaria, Estonia, Greece, and Poland. In 3 countries that have already implemented the 4-level intervention (Hungary, Ireland, and Spain), activities have been extended to new regions. In addition, the nationwide uptake of the iFightDepression tool by patients with depression has been promoted in all mentioned countries and Italy. RESULTS: To evaluate the implementation of the 4-level intervention and the iFightDepression tool, data related to the process, output, and outcome were collected between 2022 and 2024. Data processing and analyses started in 2023. Analyses are expected to be completed in 2024. Results are expected to be published in 2025. CONCLUSIONS: This paper informs researchers, practitioners, and stakeholders on how to implement best practices in mental health promotion and evaluate their effectiveness. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/64218.

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)0.040
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0400.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0530.010

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 head0.559
GPT teacher head0.709
Teacher spread0.150 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicDigital Mental Health Interventions→French-language works237,207→