search
Back to results

App-based Mental Health Promotion in Young European Adults (ECoWeB)

Primary Purpose

Wellbeing, Mental Disorder

Status
Active
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
International
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Tailored Emotional Competence Self-help
Cognitive-behavioural Approach
Self-monitoring
Sponsored by
University of Exeter
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional prevention trial for Wellbeing focused on measuring Promotion, Prevention, Mobile App, Emotional Competence, Emotional Resiliance, Wellbeing

Eligibility Criteria

16 Years - 22 Years (Child, Adult)All SexesAccepts Healthy Volunteers

ECoWeB-PROMOTE Trial

Inclusion criteria

  1. Aged 16-22, in the UK, Spain, Belgium and Germany.
  2. not indicating elevated vulnerability based on the EC profile within the baseline assessment (as described above);
  3. basic literacy in English, Spanish, German, or Dutch, as indicated by ability to complete consent and online questionnaires (12year old reading age or better).
  4. Ability to provide informed consent
  5. Available for the full duration of the study (12 months)
  6. Regular access to a relevant smart phone (using android or IOS systems)

Exclusion criteria

  1. Meeting criteria on self-report electronic screening questionnaires for any of the following

    1. current episode or past episode of major depressive disorder reported on the LIDAS and PHQ9
    2. any diagnosis of depression
    3. active suicidality; or
    4. any history of severe mental health problem (i.e., bipolar/psychosis);
  2. Currently receiving psychological therapy or counselling or antidepressants or other psychiatric medication.
  3. Elevated vulnerability on their emotional competence as assessed within the baseline assessment

ECoWeB-PREVENT Trial

Inclusion criteria

  1. Aged 16-22, in the UK, Spain, Belgium and Germany
  2. screened for elevated vulnerability criteria on their Emotional Competence profile as assessed within the baseline assessment (as described above);
  3. basic literacy in English, Spanish, German, or Dutch as indicated by ability to complete consent and online questionnaires (12year old reading age or better).
  4. Ability to provide informed consent
  5. Available for the full duration of the study (12 months)
  6. Regular access to a relevant smart phone (using android or IOS systems)

Exclusion criteria

  1. Meeting criteria on self-report electronic screening questionnaires for any of the following

    1. current episode or past episode of major depressive disorder reported on the LIDAS and PHQ9
    2. any diagnosis of depression
    3. active suicidality; or
    4. any history of severe mental health problem (i.e., bipolar/psychosis);
  2. Currently receiving psychological therapy or counselling or antidepressants or other psychiatric medication.

Sites / Locations

  • Ghent University
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU)
  • Universitat Jaume I
  • University of Exeter

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm 3

Arm Type

Experimental

Active Comparator

Placebo Comparator

Arm Label

Tailored Emotional Competence

Cognitive-behavioural Approach

Self-monitoring

Arm Description

Self-help Tailored Emotional Competence delivered via mobile app

Self-help cognitive-behavioural approach delivered via mobile app

Self-help self-monitoring delivered via mobile app

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measure PROMOTE Trial: Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well Being Scale (WEMWBS)
WEMWBS Well-being questionnaire (Tennant et al., 2007; Stewart-Brown et al., 2009) Uni-dimensional scale. Higher scores indicate greater well-being. Scale range 0 to 70 where 70 represents high well-being.
Primary Outcome Measure PREVENT Trial (PHQ9)
PHQ9 Depression questionnaire (Kroenke et al., 2001). Answered are summed to calculate total score. Scale range 0 to 27 where 27 represents severe depression.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7)
GAD7 Anxiety questionnaire (Spitzer et al., 2006) Answered are summed to calculate total score. Scale range 0 to 21 where 21 represents high anxiety.
Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS)
WSAS Social functioning questionnaire (Mundt et al., 2002). Answered are summed to calculate total score. Scale range 0 to 40 where 40 represents low functionality.
Quality of Life (EuroQuol 5D-3L)
Quality of life questionnaire (Herdman et al., 2011). Descriptive system comprises the following five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: no problems, some problems, and extreme problems.
Adult Service Use Schedule (ADSUS-adapted)
ADSUS Service Use Questionnaire. 5 with two parts, A) first rate yes/no presence of service use then B) details around times/nights of service use.
Lifetime Depression Assessment Self-Report Questionnaire (LIDAS)
LIDAS Depression assessment questionnaire (Bot et al, 2017). Higher scores indicate more depressive symptoms.
Adverse Events Questionnaire (AEQ)
AEQ (Carver, 1998) Questionnaire to measure stressful events. 5 point scale with a score of 1-5 for each item.

Full Information

First Posted
September 6, 2019
Last Updated
July 25, 2022
Sponsor
University of Exeter
Collaborators
University Ghent, Ludwig-Maximilians - University of Munich, Universitat Jaume I, AUDEERING GMBH, Institute of Communications and Computer Systems, Athens, Greece, MONSENSO APS, University of Oxford, VYSOKE UCENI TECHNICKE V BRNE, FRAUNHOFER GESELLSCHAFT ZUR FOERDERUNG DER ANGEWANDTEN FORSCHUNG, University of Geneva, Switzerland, OBENHAVNS UNIVERSITET, DEUTSCHES JUGENDINSTITUT EV
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT04148508
Brief Title
App-based Mental Health Promotion in Young European Adults
Acronym
ECoWeB
Official Title
Assessing and Enhancing Emotional Competence for Well-Being in Young Adults: A Principled, Evidence-based, Mobile-health Approach to Prevent Mental Disorders and Promote Mental Well-being
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
July 2022
Overall Recruitment Status
Active, not recruiting
Study Start Date
October 9, 2020 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
September 30, 2022 (Anticipated)
Study Completion Date
September 30, 2022 (Anticipated)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
University of Exeter
Collaborators
University Ghent, Ludwig-Maximilians - University of Munich, Universitat Jaume I, AUDEERING GMBH, Institute of Communications and Computer Systems, Athens, Greece, MONSENSO APS, University of Oxford, VYSOKE UCENI TECHNICKE V BRNE, FRAUNHOFER GESELLSCHAFT ZUR FOERDERUNG DER ANGEWANDTEN FORSCHUNG, University of Geneva, Switzerland, OBENHAVNS UNIVERSITET, DEUTSCHES JUGENDINSTITUT EV

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
Yes

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
The ECoWeB Project aims to develop and disseminate a mobile application (App) to provide engaging and personalized tools and psychological skills to promote emotional wellbeing and prevent mental health problems in adolescents and young adults. The project team involves 8 European nations (the United Kingdom, Germany, Belgium, Spain, Greece, the Czech Republic, Denmark, and Switzerland) working together in order to improve mental health care and access for adolescents and young adults: To use technology as a tool to assess and promote emotional well-being. To deliver empirically supported psychological interventions through a smart phone application to address the needs of adolescents and young adults. To improve mental well-being and prevent mental health problems in European adolescents and young adults. The ECoWeb project will consist of 2 RCT's within a longitudinal prospective cohort called ECoWeB-PROMOTE (indicating PROMOTION of well-being and good mental health) and ECoWeB-PREVENT (indicating PREVENTION of general distress, poor mental health and emotional disorders) respectively. These trials share the same recruitment procedure, interventions, outcomes (including self-report measures of well-being, anxiety, and depression) and design. Both are interested in the promotion of well-being and the prevention of general poor mental health in young people. The key difference is whether the participants are deemed to be at higher or lower risk criteria for poor mental health based on their general emotional competence skills, i.e., for those at low risk, do the interventions further enhance well-being, for those at higher risk, do the interventions prevent the worsening of poor mental health, general stress and distress, as well as enhancing well-being. In all cases the recruitment procedure will be the same, but the inclusion and exclusion criteria are different and the primary outcome measures are different hence they are 2 trials, rather than one, all running within the same cohort.
Detailed Description
The effect of the personalised self-help on EC, well-being, risk trajectories, general mental health difficulties, and social, educational, and occupational outcomes, will be evaluated using cohort multiple randomized controlled trials (cmRCTs; Relton et al., 2010). Eligible (healthy) individuals within the prospective cohort meeting relevant criteria will consent to be monitored for a year using a self-help app and web-site assessments. Some of the cohort will be selected at random to be offered additional self-help elements within the app. It is important to recognise that all participants in the cohort consent at the outset to provide data to be used to assess the benefit of the self-help apps for the outcomes of interest. In a cmRCT, a large observational cohort of participants meeting eligibility criteria is recruited (N) and their outcomes regularly measured. For each RCT, information from the cohort is used to identify all eligible participants (NA). Some eligible participants (nA) are randomly selected and offered the app with self-help components. The outcomes of these randomly selected participants (nA) are then compared with the outcomes of eligible participants not randomly selected; that is, for ECoWeB, those receiving usual practice plus the ECoWeB monitoring through the app (NA-nA). The cmRCT design has multiple advantages: (i) it effectively combines a prospective long-term longitudinal cohort with a randomised trial(s): random selection of some participants is equivalent to random allocation of all with respect to generating 2+ groups whose selection and treatment have not been influenced by anyone or anything other than chance and where all known or unknown prognostic factors are distributed evenly at baseline, enabling strong inference about the causal effects of each intervention, whilst retaining key comparison groups that provide information as to the natural history of the condition and to usual care, essential for assessing primary prevention; (ii) consent to "try" a particular intervention is sought only from those offered that intervention, thus replicating the information and consent procedures that exist in routine health care; (iii) because individuals consent in advance to the option of having an intervention offered if eligible, the investigators avoid individuals being knowingly allocated to a "lesser" usual care condition, enhancing recruitment and retention; (iii) there is the facility for multiple RCTs within one cohort; (iv) increased efficiency and representativeness of the sample as longitudinal observational studies typically recruit a greater quantity and more representative sample of participants than RCTs; (v) because the investigators are recruiting from the general population of interested young people and not specifically recruiting individuals with elevated vulnerability or identified problems (and not seeking a clinical population - those with current or past history of psychiatric disorders are excluded), this approach minimises issues of stigmatization by making participation not limited to those with mental health issues but open for all - indeed one goal is that this approach to explore EC will spark interest and dialogue about EC and mental health in young people generally, and communicate how EC is relevant to everyone on a continuum (i.e., an explicitly destigmatizing approach), designed as a public health approach for the general population; (vi) there is no re-use of data and permissions as the cmRCT approach requires that the original consent is for both participation in the cohort and potentially being offered an intervention. The cmRCT design enables us to: (i) examine the course of mental well-being and general mental health symptoms over time in higher-risk and lower-risk young people determined on their EC profiles, who are left to their own devices, providing a natural course "baseline" group to assess the trajectory of well-being and symptoms over time and its relationship to EC, and to (ii) test if mobile app based self-help designed to improve EC can change this trajectory. The investigators thus simultaneously test: (a) a central assumption of the EC model that deficits in EC at baseline will predict greater symptoms of poor mental health and reduced mental well-being at 3 and 12 months, controlling for baseline symptoms and well-being; (b) evaluate whether manipulating EC enhances outcomes, enabling strong causal inference. The ECoWeb project will consist of 2 RCT's called ECoWeB-PROMOTE (indicating PROMOTION of well-being and good mental health) and ECoWeB-PREVENT (indicating PREVENTION of general distress, poor mental health and emotional disorders). These trials share the same recruitment procedure, interventions, outcomes (including self-report measures of well-being, anxiety, and depression) and design. Both are interested in the promotion of well-being and the prevention of general poor mental health in young people. The key difference is whether the participants are deemed to be at higher or lower risk criteria for poor mental health based on their general emotional competence skills, i.e., for those at low risk, do the interventions further enhance well-being, for those at higher risk, do the interventions prevent the worsening of poor mental health, general stress and distress, as well as enhancing well-being. In all cases the recruitment procedure will be the same, but the inclusion and exclusion criteria are different and the primary outcome measures are different hence they are 2 trials, rather than one, all running within the same cohort. The ECoWeB-PROMOTE trial will recruit participants not showing elevated risk on their EC profile. The ECoWeB-PROMOTE trial primarily aims to improve and maintain wellbeing in those that are relatively well. A range of indices of poor mental health and wellbeing will be used as outcome measures including wellbeing, depression, anxiety and functioning: Because one index Is needed for the primary outcome, wellbeing on the WEMWBS is the primary outcome measure as potentially most relevant and sensitive for a population that is relatively well. The ECoWeB-PREVENT trial will recruit participants who have a hypothesized elevated risk of poor mental health based on their EC profile (although they are still well as the investigators are excluding participants with current or past psychiatric disorders) with the primary aim of reducing that risk through the self-help app and promoting well-being (but not selected on clinical diagnoses or symptoms). A range of indices of poor mental health and wellbeing will be used as outcome measures including wellbeing, depression, anxiety and functioning: Because one index Is needed for the primary outcome, depression symptoms (on the Patient health Questionnaire 9) have been selected as the primary outcome, as potentially the most sensitive and important index of poor mental health and distress, and as a strong predictor of future mental illness. Elevated risk will be determined by an assessment of emotional competence (EC). Participants EC will be assessed by their scores on the emotional competence questionnaires that participants complete at their baseline assessment. An algorithm is being developed to decide what combination of scores on the EC measures represent high and low risk, based on scoring in the least optimal quartile/tertile against normative data for this age group. The remit for the Horizon2020 grant scheme is to work towards improving promotion of mental wellbeing and primary prevention of mental disorders, hence the ECoWeB-PREVENT and ECoWeB-PROMOTE trials exclude those with a history of past depression and current depression or a diagnosis of bipolar disorder or psychosis. The sample recruited will therefore be as inclusive as possible across the wider population of 16-22year olds and by definition are not a clinical population.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Wellbeing, Mental Disorder
Keywords
Promotion, Prevention, Mobile App, Emotional Competence, Emotional Resiliance, Wellbeing

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Prevention
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Model Description
Phase III superiority parallel 3-arm randomised multi-centre, multinational cohort randomized controlled trials (cmRCT)
Masking
ParticipantInvestigatorOutcomes Assessor
Masking Description
Researchers will be blinded to condition. Participants join a cohort and all receive an App, but are not explicitly told which condition they are in.
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
3840 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Tailored Emotional Competence
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Self-help Tailored Emotional Competence delivered via mobile app
Arm Title
Cognitive-behavioural Approach
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Self-help cognitive-behavioural approach delivered via mobile app
Arm Title
Self-monitoring
Arm Type
Placebo Comparator
Arm Description
Self-help self-monitoring delivered via mobile app
Intervention Type
Behavioral
Intervention Name(s)
Tailored Emotional Competence Self-help
Intervention Description
The active interventions are all entirely self-help and provide psycho-education, tips, advice and strategies for well-being promotion. Interventions are personalised to the individual based on emotional competence skills. Intervention is in addition to self-monitoring in the app. Intervention components include selection of 2 from 4 of : targeting worry and rumination; increasing emotional knowledge and perception skills; improving achievement appraisals including attribution retraining and growth mindset; improving social appraisals including positive interpretations of ambiguous social events
Intervention Type
Behavioral
Intervention Name(s)
Cognitive-behavioural Approach
Intervention Description
The active interventions are all entirely self-help and provide psycho-education, tips, advice and strategies for well-being promotion, based on cognitive-behavioural principles such as increased activity and challenging negative thinking. Interventions are generic and common to all participants. Intervention is in addition to self-monitoring in the app.
Intervention Type
Behavioral
Intervention Name(s)
Self-monitoring
Intervention Description
Self-monitoring app that involves monitoring emotions and emotional events over time within the app and being able to review emotion over time
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Primary Outcome Measure PROMOTE Trial: Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well Being Scale (WEMWBS)
Description
WEMWBS Well-being questionnaire (Tennant et al., 2007; Stewart-Brown et al., 2009) Uni-dimensional scale. Higher scores indicate greater well-being. Scale range 0 to 70 where 70 represents high well-being.
Time Frame
Primary outcome endpoint at 3 months
Title
Primary Outcome Measure PREVENT Trial (PHQ9)
Description
PHQ9 Depression questionnaire (Kroenke et al., 2001). Answered are summed to calculate total score. Scale range 0 to 27 where 27 represents severe depression.
Time Frame
Primary outcome endpoint at 3 months
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7)
Description
GAD7 Anxiety questionnaire (Spitzer et al., 2006) Answered are summed to calculate total score. Scale range 0 to 21 where 21 represents high anxiety.
Time Frame
Primary end-point at 3 months
Title
Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS)
Description
WSAS Social functioning questionnaire (Mundt et al., 2002). Answered are summed to calculate total score. Scale range 0 to 40 where 40 represents low functionality.
Time Frame
Primary outcome endpoint at 3 months
Title
Quality of Life (EuroQuol 5D-3L)
Description
Quality of life questionnaire (Herdman et al., 2011). Descriptive system comprises the following five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: no problems, some problems, and extreme problems.
Time Frame
Primary outcome endpoint at 3 months
Title
Adult Service Use Schedule (ADSUS-adapted)
Description
ADSUS Service Use Questionnaire. 5 with two parts, A) first rate yes/no presence of service use then B) details around times/nights of service use.
Time Frame
Primary outcome endpoint at 3 months
Title
Lifetime Depression Assessment Self-Report Questionnaire (LIDAS)
Description
LIDAS Depression assessment questionnaire (Bot et al, 2017). Higher scores indicate more depressive symptoms.
Time Frame
Primary outcome endpoint at 3 months
Title
Adverse Events Questionnaire (AEQ)
Description
AEQ (Carver, 1998) Questionnaire to measure stressful events. 5 point scale with a score of 1-5 for each item.
Time Frame
Primary outcome endpoint at 3 months
Other Pre-specified Outcome Measures:
Title
Process (mediator)- impact of social appraisal on emotional competence
Description
General and Achievement Appraisal: Measures of appraisal will be derived from existing well-validated instruments that use participant ratings in response to multiple scenarios to indirectly assess major appraisal dimensions (e.g., the Emotion-Index; the Coping-Index (Scherer, 2007, p. 109-110) and newly developed instruments (e.g., the Appraisal Bias Questionnaire and the Emotion Disposition Index), shortened into one brief instrument. Associated achievement-related emotions and perceived control will be measured using abbreviated and brief domain-general variants of Achievement Emotions Questionnaire subscales, which have excellent reliability, internal test validity and external test validity (Pekrun et al., 2011, 2017) and of the perceived academic control and perceived academic value scales (Marsh et al., 2016; Pekrun et al., 2007, 2017). Final items will depend on reliability and redundancy between measures in validation studies.
Time Frame
Primary outcome endpoint at 3 months
Title
Process (mediator)- impact of rejection sensitivity on emotional competence
Description
Social Appraisal: the Rejection Sensitivity Questionnaire (ARSQ) ARSQ (Berenson et al., 2009) will assess rejection sensitivity as an index of social appraisal needs. 9 scenarios with question A and B, score range 1-6.
Time Frame
Primary outcome endpoint at 3 months
Title
Process (mediator)- impact of worry on emotional competence
Description
Worry and Rumination: rumination will be assessed using well-validated and established questionnaire measure- the 8-item Penn State Worry Questionnaire-Abbreviated (Kertz et al., 2014). Score range 8 to 40 where higher score is more worry.
Time Frame
Primary outcome endpoint at 3 months
Title
Process (mediator)- impact of emotional recognition on emotional competence
Description
Emotional Knowledge and Perception: Adapted, shortened and abbreviated versions of the Geneva Emotion Recognition Test Short, GERT-S 20- Performance-based emotion recognition test (Schlegel, K., & Scherer, K. R., 2016), in which users detect and interpret emotions from the face, voice, and body from 20 short video clips.
Time Frame
Primary outcome endpoint at 3 months
Title
Process (mediator)- impact of emotional understanding on emotional competence - emotional knowledge and perception
Description
The Components of Emotion Understanding Test (CEUT-S), CEUT-S (Sekwena & Fontaine, 2017)- Questionnaire measure based on the Componential Emotion Approach) will assess emotional understanding and perception.
Time Frame
Primary outcome endpoint at 3 months
Title
Process (mediator)- impact of rumination on emotional competence
Description
Rumination will be assessed using well-validated and established questionnaire measure, the 5-item Brooding subscale of the Response Style Questionnaire (RSQ) (Treynor et al., 2003). Score 5-20 where higher score indicates more rummination.
Time Frame
Primary outcome endpoint at 3 months

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
16 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
22 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Eligibility Criteria
ECoWeB-PROMOTE Trial Inclusion criteria Aged 16-22, in the UK, Spain, Belgium and Germany. not indicating elevated vulnerability based on the EC profile within the baseline assessment (as described above); basic literacy in English, Spanish, German, or Dutch, as indicated by ability to complete consent and online questionnaires (12year old reading age or better). Ability to provide informed consent Available for the full duration of the study (12 months) Regular access to a relevant smart phone (using android or IOS systems) Exclusion criteria Meeting criteria on self-report electronic screening questionnaires for any of the following current episode or past episode of major depressive disorder reported on the LIDAS and PHQ9 any diagnosis of depression active suicidality; or any history of severe mental health problem (i.e., bipolar/psychosis); Currently receiving psychological therapy or counselling or antidepressants or other psychiatric medication. Elevated vulnerability on their emotional competence as assessed within the baseline assessment ECoWeB-PREVENT Trial Inclusion criteria Aged 16-22, in the UK, Spain, Belgium and Germany screened for elevated vulnerability criteria on their Emotional Competence profile as assessed within the baseline assessment (as described above); basic literacy in English, Spanish, German, or Dutch as indicated by ability to complete consent and online questionnaires (12year old reading age or better). Ability to provide informed consent Available for the full duration of the study (12 months) Regular access to a relevant smart phone (using android or IOS systems) Exclusion criteria Meeting criteria on self-report electronic screening questionnaires for any of the following current episode or past episode of major depressive disorder reported on the LIDAS and PHQ9 any diagnosis of depression active suicidality; or any history of severe mental health problem (i.e., bipolar/psychosis); Currently receiving psychological therapy or counselling or antidepressants or other psychiatric medication.
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Ed Watkins, PhD
Organizational Affiliation
University of Exeter
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Ghent University
City
Ghent
ZIP/Postal Code
9000
Country
Belgium
Facility Name
Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU)
City
Munich
State/Province
Muenchen
ZIP/Postal Code
80539
Country
Germany
Facility Name
Universitat Jaume I
City
Valencia
State/Province
Castellón
ZIP/Postal Code
CP 12071
Country
Spain
Facility Name
University of Exeter
City
Exeter
State/Province
Devon
ZIP/Postal Code
EX4 4QG
Country
United Kingdom

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
Yes
IPD Sharing Plan Description
De-identified individual participant and clinical and economic data reported in publications will be made available through the University of Exeter's Institutional Repository - Open Research Exeter (see https://ore.exeter.ac.uk).
IPD Sharing Time Frame
The study protocol, statistical analysis plan and informed consent form will be uploaded with this registration. Data Access: Post-analysis, the final anonymised dataset will preferentially be stored in Open Research Exeter (ORE), the University of Exeter's open access repository. The data will be available from 24 months after trial completion (end of December 2021).
IPD Sharing Access Criteria
Access to these data is permitted but controlled through requests made via the repository to a review panel from the trial team, led by the chief investigator, which will assess requests on scientific merit and commercial sensitivity. Although use is permitted, this will be on the basis that the source of the data is acknowledged (including the funder) and it includes reference to the data set 'handle', and a data access agreement is signed, subject to approval by funder.
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
20304934
Citation
Relton C, Torgerson D, O'Cathain A, Nicholl J. Rethinking pragmatic randomised controlled trials: introducing the "cohort multiple randomised controlled trial" design. BMJ. 2010 Mar 19;340:c1066. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c1066. No abstract available.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
11556941
Citation
Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med. 2001 Sep;16(9):606-13. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
18042300
Citation
Tennant R, Hiller L, Fishwick R, Platt S, Joseph S, Weich S, Parkinson J, Secker J, Stewart-Brown S. The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS): development and UK validation. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2007 Nov 27;5:63. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-5-63.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
16717171
Citation
Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB, Lowe B. A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med. 2006 May 22;166(10):1092-7. doi: 10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
19228398
Citation
Stewart-Brown S, Tennant A, Tennant R, Platt S, Parkinson J, Weich S. Internal construct validity of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS): a Rasch analysis using data from the Scottish Health Education Population Survey. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2009 Feb 19;7:15. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-7-15.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
11983645
Citation
Mundt JC, Marks IM, Shear MK, Greist JH. The Work and Social Adjustment Scale: a simple measure of impairment in functioning. Br J Psychiatry. 2002 May;180:461-4. doi: 10.1192/bjp.180.5.461.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
21479777
Citation
Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D, Bonsel G, Badia X. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011 Dec;20(10):1727-36. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9903-x. Epub 2011 Apr 9.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
16768595
Citation
Donnellan MB, Oswald FL, Baird BM, Lucas RE. The mini-IPIP scales: tiny-yet-effective measures of the Big Five factors of personality. Psychol Assess. 2006 Jun;18(2):192-203. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.18.2.192.
Results Reference
background
Citation
Goldberg, L. R., (1999) A broad-bandwith, public-domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several Five-Factor models I. Mervielde, I.J. Deary, F. de Fruyt, F. Ostendorf (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe, Vol. 7, Tilburg University Press, Tilburg (1999), pp. 7-28
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
27702414
Citation
Bot M, Middeldorp CM, de Geus EJ, Lau HM, Sinke M, van Nieuwenhuizen B, Smit JH, Boomsma DI, Penninx BW. Validity of LIDAS (LIfetime Depression Assessment Self-report): a self-report online assessment of lifetime major depressive disorder. Psychol Med. 2017 Jan;47(2):279-289. doi: 10.1017/S0033291716002312. Epub 2016 Oct 5.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
9728418
Citation
Carver CS. Generalization, adverse events, and development of depressive symptoms. J Pers. 1998 Aug;66(4):607-19. doi: 10.1111/1467-6494.00026.
Results Reference
background
Citation
Scherer, K.R., Hosoya, G., & Ryser, A. (2019). Modelling the effects of dispositional determinants on the frequency of experiencing depressive mood in the Swiss Household Panel. In preparation.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
32718175
Citation
Scherer KR. Evidence for the existence of emotion dispositions and the effects of appraisal bias. Emotion. 2021 Sep;21(6):1224-1238. doi: 10.1037/emo0000861. Epub 2020 Jul 27.
Results Reference
background
Citation
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Frenzel, A.C., Barchfield, P., & Perry, R.P. (2011). Measuring emotions in students' learning and performance: The Achievement Emotions Questionnaire (AEQ). Contemp Educ Psychol, 36, 36-48
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
20160869
Citation
Berenson KR, Gyurak A, Ayduk O, Downey G, Garner MJ, Mogg K, Bradley BP, Pine DS. Rejection sensitivity and disruption of attention by social threat cues. J Res Pers. 2009 Dec 1;43(6):1064-1072. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2009.07.007.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
11195984
Citation
Mathews A, Mackintosh B. Induced emotional interpretation bias and anxiety. J Abnorm Psychol. 2000 Nov;109(4):602-15.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
1890582
Citation
Nolen-Hoeksema S, Morrow J. A prospective study of depression and posttraumatic stress symptoms after a natural disaster: the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1991 Jul;61(1):115-21. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.61.1.115.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
12847777
Citation
Hopko DR, Stanley MA, Reas DL, Wetherell JL, Beck JG, Novy DM, Averill PM. Assessing worry in older adults: confirmatory factor analysis of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire and psychometric properties of an abbreviated model. Psychol Assess. 2003 Jun;15(2):173-83. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.15.2.173.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
21315886
Citation
Ehring T, Zetsche U, Weidacker K, Wahl K, Schonfeld S, Ehlers A. The Perseverative Thinking Questionnaire (PTQ): validation of a content-independent measure of repetitive negative thinking. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2011 Jun;42(2):225-32. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2010.12.003. Epub 2010 Dec 21.
Results Reference
background
Citation
Sekwena, E.K. & Fontaine, J.R.J. (2018). Redefining and assessing emotional understanding based on the componential emotion approach. South African J of Psychol, 48(2), 243-254.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
26416137
Citation
Schlegel K, Scherer KR. Introducing a short version of the Geneva Emotion Recognition Test (GERT-S): Psychometric properties and construct validation. Behav Res Methods. 2016 Dec;48(4):1383-1392. doi: 10.3758/s13428-015-0646-4.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
32962684
Citation
Newbold A, Warren FC, Taylor RS, Hulme C, Burnett S, Aas B, Botella C, Burkhardt F, Ehring T, Fontaine JRJ, Frost M, Garcia-Palacios A, Greimel E, Hoessle C, Hovasapian A, Huyghe V, Lochner J, Molinari G, Pekrun R, Platt B, Rosenkranz T, Scherer KR, Schlegel K, Schulte-Korne G, Suso C, Voigt V, Watkins ER. Promotion of mental health in young adults via mobile phone app: study protocol of the ECoWeB (emotional competence for well-being in Young adults) cohort multiple randomised trials. BMC Psychiatry. 2020 Sep 22;20(1):458. doi: 10.1186/s12888-020-02857-w.
Results Reference
derived

Learn more about this trial

App-based Mental Health Promotion in Young European Adults

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs