Promoting Graduate Student Mental Health During COVID-19: Acceptability, Feasibility, and Perceived Utility of an Online Single-Session Intervention
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
DOI:
10.3389/fpsyg.2021.569785
Publication Date:
2021-04-07T06:11:42Z
AUTHORS (5)
ABSTRACT
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 be especially helpful in improving access to care during the crisis. However, little is known about the uptake, acceptability, and perceived utility of these interventions outside of clinical trials in which participants are compensated. Here, we describe the development, deployment, acceptability ratings, and pre–post effects of a single-session intervention, the Common Elements Toolbox (COMET), adapted for the COVID-19 crisis to support graduate and professional students. Participants (n = 263), who were not compensated, were randomly assigned to two of three modules: behavioral activation, cognitive restructuring, and gratitude. Over 1 week, 263 individuals began and 189 individuals (72%) completed the intervention. Participants reported that the intervention modules were acceptable (93% endorsing), helpful (88%), engaging (86%), applicable to their lives (87%), and could help them manage COVID-related challenges (88%). Participants reported pre- to post-program improvements in secondary control (i.e., the belief that one can control their reactions to objective events; dav = 0.36, dz = 0.50, p < 0.001) and in the perceived negative impact of the COVID-19 crisis on their quality of life (dav = 0.22, dz = 0.25, p < 0.001). On average, differences in their perceived ability to handle lifestyle changes resulting from the pandemic were positive, but small and at the level of a non-significant trend (dav = 0.13, dz = 0.14, p = 0.066). Our results highlight the acceptability and utility of an online intervention for supporting individuals through the COVID-19 crisis.
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
Coming soon ....
REFERENCES (51)
CITATIONS (60)
EXTERNAL LINKS
PlumX Metrics
RECOMMENDATIONS
FAIR ASSESSMENT
Coming soon ....
JUPYTER LAB
Coming soon ....