Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38551647›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2024

Design of a Remote Multiparametric Tool to Assess Mental Well-Being and Distress in Young People (mHealth Methods in Mental Health Research Project): Protocol for an Observational Study.

Thais Castro Ribeiro, Esther García Pagès, Laura Ballester, Gemma Vilagut, Helena García Mieres, Víctor Suárez Aragonès, Franco Amigo, Raquel Bailón, Philippe Mortier, Víctor Pérez Sola and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
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

13 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Thais Castro RibeiroCIBER de Bioingeniería, Biomateriales y Nanomedicina (CIBER-BBN), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2536-7194
Esther García PagèsCIBER de Bioingeniería, Biomateriales y Nanomedicina (CIBER-BBN), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9225-845X
Laura BallesterCIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4892-7003
Gemma VilagutCIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3714-226X
Helena García MieresCIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2813-1737
Víctor Suárez AragonèsDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychobiology, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9989-9129
Franco AmigoCIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3602-5168
Raquel BailónCIBER de Bioingeniería, Biomateriales y Nanomedicina (CIBER-BBN), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1272-0550
Philippe MortierCIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2113-6241
Víctor Pérez SolaCIBER en Salud Mental (CIBERSAM), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5825-2337
Antoni Serrano-BlancoCIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6123-0633
Jordi AlonsoCIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8627-9636
Jordi AguilóCIBER de Bioingeniería, Biomateriales y Nanomedicina (CIBER-BBN), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4691-5754
Instituto de Salud Carlos III · ESUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ESUniversitat Pompeu Fabra · ESUniversidad de Zaragoza · ESUniversitat de Barcelona · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMental health conditions have become a substantial cause of disability worldwide, resulting in economic burden and strain on the public health system. Incorporating cognitive and physiological biomarkers using noninvasive sensors combined with self-reported questionnaires can provide a more accurate characterization of the individual's well-being. Biomarkers such as heart rate variability or those extracted from the electrodermal activity signal are commonly considered as indices of autonomic nervous system functioning, providing objective indicators of stress response. A model combining a set of these biomarkers can constitute a comprehensive tool to remotely assess mental well-being and distress.

objectiveThis study aims to design and validate a remote multiparametric tool, including physiological and cognitive variables, to objectively assess mental well-being and distress.

methodsThis ongoing observational study pursues to enroll 60 young participants (aged 18-34 years) in 3 groups, including participants with high mental well-being, participants with mild to moderate psychological distress, and participants diagnosed with depression or anxiety disorder. The inclusion and exclusion criteria are being evaluated through a web-based questionnaire, and for those with a mental health condition, the criteria are identified by psychologists. The assessment consists of collecting mental health self-reported measures and physiological data during a baseline state, the Stroop Color and Word Test as a stress-inducing stage, and a final recovery period. Several variables related to heart rate variability, pulse arrival time, breathing, electrodermal activity, and peripheral temperature are collected using medical and wearable devices. A second assessment is carried out after 1 month. The assessment tool will be developed using self-reported questionnaires assessing well-being (short version of Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), and depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9) as the reference. We will perform correlation and principal component analysis to reduce the number of variables, followed by the calculation of multiple regression models. Test-retest reliability, known-group validity, and predictive validity will be assessed.

resultsParticipant recruitment is being carried out on a university campus and in mental health services. Recruitment commenced in October 2022 and is expected to be completed by June 2024. As of July 2023, we have recruited 41 participants. Most participants correspond to the group with mild to moderate psychological distress (n=20, 49%), followed by the high mental well-being group (n=13, 32%) and those diagnosed with a mental health condition (n=8, 20%). Data preprocessing is currently ongoing, and publication of the first results is expected by September 2024.

conclusionsThis study will establish an initial framework for a comprehensive mental health assessment tool, taking measurements from sophisticated devices, with the goal of progressing toward a remotely accessible and objectively measured approach that maintains an acceptable level of accuracy in clinical practice and epidemiological studies.

trial registrationOSF Registries N3GCH; https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/N3GCH. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/51298.

Indexed as

anxietydepressionexperimental protocolmental healthmental well-beingmHealthmobile healthphysiological variablesremote monitoring

Identifiers

PMID38551647
PMCPMC11015365
OpenAlexW4390759729

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.