基于人工智能的认知行为疗法培训工具的初步研究。

IF 2.6 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Psychotherapy Pub Date : 2025-01-27 DOI:10.1037/pst0000550
Sarah L Kopelovich, Roisín Slevin, Rachel M Brian, Victoria Shepard, Scott A Baldwin, Dror Ben-Zeev, Mike Tanana, Zac Imel
{"title":"基于人工智能的认知行为疗法培训工具的初步研究。","authors":"Sarah L Kopelovich, Roisín Slevin, Rachel M Brian, Victoria Shepard, Scott A Baldwin, Dror Ben-Zeev, Mike Tanana, Zac Imel","doi":"10.1037/pst0000550","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We developed an asynchronous online cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) training tool that provides artificial intelligence- (AI-) enabled feedback to learners across eight CBT skills. We sought to evaluate the technical reliability and to ascertain how practitioners would use the tool to inform product iteration and future deployment. We conducted a single-arm 2-week field trial among behavioral health practitioners who treat outpatients with psychosis. Practitioners (<i>N</i> = 21) were invited to use the AI-enabled CBT training tool over a 2-week (15 days, inclusive) period. To enable naturalistic observation, no adjustments were made to their workloads nor were prescriptions on use provided. We conducted daily assessments and collected backend analytics for all users. At end point, we assessed acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility of implementation, perceived usability, satisfaction, and perceived impact of training. We observed four types of technical issues: broken links, intermittent issues receiving AI-enabled feedback, video replay errors, and an HTML error. Participants averaged 6.57 logins over the 2 weeks, with more than half engaging daily. Most participants (44.7%) engaged for < 30-min increments. Usability scores exceeded industry standard and satisfaction scores indicated good promotion of the tool. All participants endorsed high feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness. Twelve participants (57%) used the AI-enabled feedback feature; those who did tended to report improved satisfaction, feasibility, and perceived impact of the training. The training tool was used by practitioners in a routine care setting, met or exceeded conventional implementation benchmarks, and may support skill improvement; however, data suggest that practitioners may need support or accountability to fully leverage the training tool. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20910,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preliminary investigation of an artificial intelligence-based cognitive behavioral therapy training tool.\",\"authors\":\"Sarah L Kopelovich, Roisín Slevin, Rachel M Brian, Victoria Shepard, Scott A Baldwin, Dror Ben-Zeev, Mike Tanana, Zac Imel\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/pst0000550\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>We developed an asynchronous online cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) training tool that provides artificial intelligence- (AI-) enabled feedback to learners across eight CBT skills. We sought to evaluate the technical reliability and to ascertain how practitioners would use the tool to inform product iteration and future deployment. We conducted a single-arm 2-week field trial among behavioral health practitioners who treat outpatients with psychosis. Practitioners (<i>N</i> = 21) were invited to use the AI-enabled CBT training tool over a 2-week (15 days, inclusive) period. To enable naturalistic observation, no adjustments were made to their workloads nor were prescriptions on use provided. We conducted daily assessments and collected backend analytics for all users. At end point, we assessed acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility of implementation, perceived usability, satisfaction, and perceived impact of training. We observed four types of technical issues: broken links, intermittent issues receiving AI-enabled feedback, video replay errors, and an HTML error. Participants averaged 6.57 logins over the 2 weeks, with more than half engaging daily. Most participants (44.7%) engaged for < 30-min increments. Usability scores exceeded industry standard and satisfaction scores indicated good promotion of the tool. All participants endorsed high feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness. Twelve participants (57%) used the AI-enabled feedback feature; those who did tended to report improved satisfaction, feasibility, and perceived impact of the training. The training tool was used by practitioners in a routine care setting, met or exceeded conventional implementation benchmarks, and may support skill improvement; however, data suggest that practitioners may need support or accountability to fully leverage the training tool. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20910,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychotherapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/pst0000550\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pst0000550","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Preliminary investigation of an artificial intelligence-based cognitive behavioral therapy training tool.

We developed an asynchronous online cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) training tool that provides artificial intelligence- (AI-) enabled feedback to learners across eight CBT skills. We sought to evaluate the technical reliability and to ascertain how practitioners would use the tool to inform product iteration and future deployment. We conducted a single-arm 2-week field trial among behavioral health practitioners who treat outpatients with psychosis. Practitioners (N = 21) were invited to use the AI-enabled CBT training tool over a 2-week (15 days, inclusive) period. To enable naturalistic observation, no adjustments were made to their workloads nor were prescriptions on use provided. We conducted daily assessments and collected backend analytics for all users. At end point, we assessed acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility of implementation, perceived usability, satisfaction, and perceived impact of training. We observed four types of technical issues: broken links, intermittent issues receiving AI-enabled feedback, video replay errors, and an HTML error. Participants averaged 6.57 logins over the 2 weeks, with more than half engaging daily. Most participants (44.7%) engaged for < 30-min increments. Usability scores exceeded industry standard and satisfaction scores indicated good promotion of the tool. All participants endorsed high feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness. Twelve participants (57%) used the AI-enabled feedback feature; those who did tended to report improved satisfaction, feasibility, and perceived impact of the training. The training tool was used by practitioners in a routine care setting, met or exceeded conventional implementation benchmarks, and may support skill improvement; however, data suggest that practitioners may need support or accountability to fully leverage the training tool. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psychotherapy
Psychotherapy PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
12.00%
发文量
93
期刊介绍: Psychotherapy Theory, Research, Practice, Training publishes a wide variety of articles relevant to the field of psychotherapy. The journal strives to foster interactions among individuals involved with training, practice theory, and research since all areas are essential to psychotherapy. This journal is an invaluable resource for practicing clinical and counseling psychologists, social workers, and mental health professionals.
期刊最新文献
Development of an artificial intelligence-based measure of therapists' skills: A multimodal proof of concept. Leveraging natural language processing to enhance feedback-informed group therapy: A proof of concept. Therapist affect focus and patient outcomes in psychodynamic therapy: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Preliminary investigation of an artificial intelligence-based cognitive behavioral therapy training tool. Parsing the existential isolation-outcome association into its within- and between-patient components in naturalistic psychotherapy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1