Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34026568›Full record

ArticleInternet interventions2021

The Supportive Accountability Inventory: Psychometric properties of a measure of supportive accountability in coached digital interventions.

Jonah Meyerhoff, Shefali Haldar, David C Mohr

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Internet interventions, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jonah MeyerhoffCenter for Behavioral Intervention Technologies (CBITs), Department of Preventive Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, 750 North Lake Shore Drive, 10 Floor, Chicago, IL 60611, United States of America.
Shefali HaldarCenter for Behavioral Intervention Technologies (CBITs), Department of Preventive Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, 750 North Lake Shore Drive, 10 Floor, Chicago, IL 60611, United States of America.
David C MohrCenter for Behavioral Intervention Technologies (CBITs), Department of Preventive Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, 750 North Lake Shore Drive, 10 Floor, Chicago, IL 60611, United States of America.

Funding

Northwestern University Clinical and Translational Science Institute (NUCATS)UL1TR001422 · NCATS · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI D'AQUILA, RICHARD · 2015 to 2023
$56.8M
Technology Enabled Services for Coordinated Care of Depression in Healthcare SettingsP50MH119029 · NIMH · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI DAVID CURTIS MOHR, Jessica Lee Schleider · 2020 to 2026
$10.7M
Multidisciplinary Training Program in Digital Mental HealthT32MH115882 · NIMH · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI Darren Gergle, DAVID CURTIS MOHR · 2018 to 2026
$2.4M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001422NIMH NIH HHS P50 MH119029NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH115882
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOne of the most widely used coaching models is Supportive Accountability (SA) which aims to provide intervention users with clear expectations for intervention use, regular monitoring, and a sense that coaches are trustworthy, benevolent, and have domain expertise. However, few measures exist to study the role of the SA model on coached digital interventions. We developed the Supportive Accountability Inventory (SAI) and evaluated the underlying factor structure and psychometric properties of this brief self-report measure.

methodUsing data from a two-arm randomized trial of a remote intervention for major depressive disorder (telephone CBT [tCBT] or a stepped care model of web-based CBT [iCBT] and tCBT), we conducted an Exploratory Factor Analysis on the SAI item pool and explored the final SAI's relationship to iCBT engagement as well as to depression outcomes. Participants in our analyses (

resultsThe best fitting EFA model included only 6 items from the original pool of 8 and contained two factors: Monitoring and Expectation. Final model fit was mixed, but acceptable (

conclusionThe SAI is a brief measure of the SA framework constructs. Continued development to improve the SAI and expand the constructs it assesses is necessary, but the SAI represents the first step towards a measure of a coaching protocol that can support both coached digital mental health intervention adherence and improved outcomes.

Indexed as

Behavioral intervention technologyDigital mental healthHuman supportmHealth

Identifiers

PMID34026568
PMCPMC8122167

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.