‘Thriving with bipolar disorder’: The co-design of a peer-delivered group psychoeducation program and single-arm pilot feasibility evaluation protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Self-management strategies can be used by individuals with bipolar disorder (BD) to cope with symptoms and improve quality of life (QoL). Peer-facilitated psychoeducation has potential to diversify delivery of self-management information by capitalising on the expertise of individuals who live well with BD. This protocol describes the process of co-designing a novel peer-facilitated, QoL-focused, group psychoeducation program for people living with BD, and plans for its pilot evaluation. METHODS: Content from two web-based, self-directed psychoeducational interventions was adapted to inform a peer-facilitated group program, using a community-based participatory research (CBPR) framework. The resultant program contains eight weekly two-hour sessions on topics related to QoL in BD, and contains a combination of education, opportunities for peer-to-peer knowledge exchange, and activities that facilitate practice of self-management strategies. A single-arm pilot evaluation of this program is planned: individuals who self-identify as living with BD (~n = 40) will be recruited from the community. Four groups (~n = 10) will be delivered online by peer facilitators. The primary outcome will be feasibility (session attendance). Data will also be collected on fidelity, intervention acceptability, and impacts (QoL, mood symptoms, self-stigma, subjective recovery, self-efficacy, self-compassion, social support). A subset of participants (~n = 12) and peer facilitators (~n = 4) will be invited to participate in a feedback interview post-intervention. DISCUSSION: Recovery-oriented healthcare frameworks emphasise a focus on patient-valued outcomes and the development on a peer workforce. By evaluating this novel intervention, we hope to lay the groundwork for peer-facilitated programs specific to the priorities of individuals with BD, that may be embedded in clinical settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06878937.
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 | 0.042 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.004 |
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".