gliddon-evaluatingdiscussion-2015.pdf (549.42 kB)
Evaluating discussion board engagement in the MoodSwings online self-help program for bipolar disorder: protocol for an observational prospective cohort study
journal contribution
posted on 2015-01-01, 00:00 authored by Emma Gliddon, S Lauder, Lesley BerkLesley Berk, V Cosgrove, D Grimm, Seetal DoddSeetal Dodd, T Suppes, Michael BerkMichael BerkBACKGROUND: Online, self-guided programs exist for a wide range of mental health conditions, including bipolar disorder, and discussion boards are often part of these interventions. The impact engagement with these discussion boards has on the psychosocial well-being of users is largely unknown. More specifically we need to clarify the influence of the type and level of engagement on outcomes. The primary aim of this exploratory study is to determine if there is a relationship between different types (active, passive or none) and levels (high, mid and low) of discussion board engagement and improvement in outcome measures from baseline to follow up, with a focus on self-reported social support, stigma, quality of life and levels of depression and mania. The secondary aim of this study is to identify any differences in demographic variables among discussion users. METHODS/DESIGN: The present study is a sub-study of the MoodSwings 2.0 3-arm randomised controlled trial (discussion board only (arm 1), discussion board plus psychoeducation (arm 2), discussion board, psychoeducation plus cognitive behavioural therapy-based tools (arm 3)). Discussion engagement will be measured via online participant activity monitoring. Assessments include online self-report as well as blinded phone interviews at baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months follow up. DISCUSSION: The results of this study will help to inform future programs about whether or not discussion boards are a beneficial inclusion in online self-help interventions. It will also help to determine if motivating users to actively engage in online discussion is necessary, and if so, what level of engagement is optimal to produce the most benefit. Future programs may benefit through being able to identify those most likely to poorly engage, based on demographic variables, so motivational strategies can be targeted accordingly. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02118623 registered April 15 2014 and NCT02106078 registered May 16 2013.
History
Journal
BMC psychiatryVolume
15Season
Article Number : 243Article number
243Pagination
1 - 9Publisher
BioMed CentralLocation
London, Eng.Publisher DOI
ISSN
1471-244XeISSN
1471-244XLanguage
engPublication classification
C Journal article; C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journalCopyright notice
2015, The AuthorsUsage metrics
Categories
No categories selectedKeywords
Licence
Exports
RefWorks
BibTeX
Ref. manager
Endnote
DataCite
NLM
DC