The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2026
Urban-Rural Variation in the Efficacy of a Mobile Health Anxiety Treatment for Young Adults: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mennis Jeremy, Coatsworth J Douglas, Brown Aaron, Zaharakis Nikola, Russell Michael, Mason Michael J
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This health brief reports how the efficacy of a mobile health generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) treatment for young adults differed across the urban-rural gradient.
METHODS: Data from a randomized clinical trial (n = 102) of the GAD treatment CBT-txt-A was used to test for urban-rural moderation of the treatment effect.
RESULTS: The effect of CBT-txt-A on reducing GAD symptoms was significantly stronger for residents of more rural, than urban, regions (β = -1.949, p = .023, 95% confidence interval = -3.627, -0.271), with the treatment effect size approximately three times larger in more rural, than more urban, regions.
DISCUSSION: Though findings are considered preliminary, results may reflect the increased stigma and lack of in-person access to mental health treatment in rural areas, as well as the negative impact of urban conditions on mental health. Consideration of geographic factors may enhance treatment efficacy through population targeting and treatment personalization.
METHODS: Data from a randomized clinical trial (n = 102) of the GAD treatment CBT-txt-A was used to test for urban-rural moderation of the treatment effect.
RESULTS: The effect of CBT-txt-A on reducing GAD symptoms was significantly stronger for residents of more rural, than urban, regions (β = -1.949, p = .023, 95% confidence interval = -3.627, -0.271), with the treatment effect size approximately three times larger in more rural, than more urban, regions.
DISCUSSION: Though findings are considered preliminary, results may reflect the increased stigma and lack of in-person access to mental health treatment in rural areas, as well as the negative impact of urban conditions on mental health. Consideration of geographic factors may enhance treatment efficacy through population targeting and treatment personalization.