Promoting graduate student mental health during COVID-19: Acceptability, feasibility, and perceived utility of an online single-session intervention

• DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/x9ch8
• Publication Date: 2020-06-12T15:45:38Z
• Authors: Akash R Wasil; Madison Taylor; Rose Franzen; Joshua Steinberg; Robert DeRubeis
• Keywords: PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Developmental Psychology; graduate students; common elements; Social and Behavioral Sciences; bepress|Education|Educational Psychology; PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Clinical Psychology; evidence-based practices; bepress|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Psychology|Clinical Psychology; PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Educational Psychology; Psychology; bepress|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Psychology|Child Psychology; 0501 psychology and cognitive sciences; Intervention Research; bepress|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Psychology|Developmental Psychology; PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Developmental Psychology|Early Adulthood; Educational Psychology; digital mental health; public health; 05 social sciences; COVID-19; PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Clinical Psychology|Intervention Research; Early Adulthood; 16. Peace & justice; BF1-990; 3. Good health; PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences; Clinical Psychology; Developmental Psychology; bepress|Social and Behavioral Sciences; bepress|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Psychology|Counseling Psychology

The COVID-19 outbreak has simultaneously increased the need for mental health services and decreased their availability. Brief online self-help interventions that can be completed in a single session could especially helpful improving access to care during crisis. However, little is known about uptake, acceptability, perceived utility of these outside clinical trials which participants are compensated. Here, we describe development, deployment, acceptability ratings, pre-post effects single-session intervention, Common Elements Toolbox (COMET), adapted crisis support graduate professional students. Participants (n = 263), who were not compensated, randomly assigned two three modules: behavioral activation, cognitive restructuring, gratitude. Over one week, 263 individuals began 189 (72%) intervention. reported intervention modules acceptable (93% endorsing), (88%), engaging (86%), applicable lives (87%), help them manage COVID-related challenges (88%). pre- post-program improvements secondary control (i.e., belief reactions objective events; dav=0.36, dz=0.50, p<0.001) negative impact on quality life (dav=0.22, dz=0.25, p<0.001). On average, differences ability handle lifestyle changes resulting from pandemic positive, but small at level nonsignificant trend (dav=0.13, dz=0.14, p=0.066). Our results highlight an supporting through