Participant and facilitator perspectives on a psychoeducational intervention for individuals at risk of bipolar disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bipolar disorder often goes unrecognised for several years, leading to delayed treatment and negative outcomes. To help address this, we have developed a novel telehealth-based group psychoeducational and resilience enhancement programme for individuals at high risk for bipolar disorder (PREP-BD), aimed at improving help-seeking among adolescents and young adults at risk of developing bipolar disorder. AIMS: The purpose of the current study was to explore the perspectives of at-risk youth, their families and group facilitators who participated in the feasibility trial of PREP-BD. METHOD: = 21) of the programme, their family members and the facilitators of PREP-BD. The questions covered their experiences, opinions on the programme's structure and content and suggestions for improvement. Feedback sessions were transcribed and analysed qualitatively using inductive content analysis. RESULTS: Overall feedback was positive, with participants and facilitators appreciating the informative and engaging nature of the sessions. Some participants desired more actionable resources and complex content. Family members sought greater involvement and information about the programme. The online format was valued for convenience, but was also viewed as a barrier by some to fostering deeper connections. CONCLUSIONS: PREP-BD shows promise as a psychoeducational intervention for individuals at high risk for bipolar disorder. To enhance the programme's effectiveness, future iterations should incorporate more nuanced content, provide additional practical guidance and address the limitations of the virtual setting. Continued evaluation and optimisation are crucial for ensuring the programme's effectiveness as a tool for early intervention in bipolar disorder.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".