MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413638371 · doi:10.1186/s40814-025-01696-4

Feasibility of an ultra-brief group cognitive behavioral skills workshops for organization, time management, and planning strategies in university students: study protocol

2025· article· en· W4413638371 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Vickie Plourde, Hélène Corriveau, Shirko Ahmadi

Bibliographic record

VenuePilot and Feasibility Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsDr. Georges-L.-Dumont University Hospital CentreUniversité de MonctonUniversity of AlbertaUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersUniversité de Moncton
KeywordsPsychologyProtocol (science)CognitionTime managementApplied psychologyGroup (periodic table)Behavior managementMedical educationComputer scienceMedicineDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: University students with ADHD and executive functioning challenges are at a higher risk of experiencing academic and functional challenges. Group cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) targeting organization, time management, and planning skills have shown promise in improving attention and academic functioning. However, attendance and logistic barriers may limit participation in traditional programs. This feasibility study aims to adapt and evaluate the feasibility of delivering ultra-brief, group CBT skills workshops (both in-person and online) to university students. METHODS: A non-randomized pilot design with a convergent mixed-method approach will be used. From January 2024 to April 2025, 40-60 French-speaking students from Canadian postsecondary institutions that are experiencing attentional or executive challenges (with or without a formal ADHD diagnosis) will be recruited. The intervention consists of three weekly 90-min workshops, with strategies focusing on organization, time management, planning and prioritizing tasks, and managing procrastination. Data will be collected at pre- and post-workshop interventions including recruitment and retention rates, as well as standardized questionnaires assessing treatment perception, acceptability, and satisfaction (primary outcomes), along with ADHD symptoms, executive functioning, and functional impairment (secondary outcomes). Individual interviews (baseline evaluation) and focus groups (post-workshop evaluation) will further explore participants' functioning as well as expectations and experiences related to the intervention. Quantitative data will be analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics, whereas qualitative data will undergo qualitative descriptive analysis using rapid assessment procedure (RAP) sheets. DISCUSSION: This study will assess the "feasibility of ultra-brief CBT skills workshops for university students with ADHD and executive functioning difficulties. If effective, it could inform scalable strategies to support academic success and daily functioning. Findings will also inform the feasibility and acceptability of this intervention for future large-scale studies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score0.775

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePilot and Feasibility StudiesSame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207