Trial Outcomes & Findings for Remote Training in Evidence-based Practices for Clinicians Who Work With Migrant Workers (NCT NCT03515226)
NCT ID: NCT03515226
Last Updated: 2022-07-26
Results Overview
This is a four item measure of intervention acceptability; where each item is rated on a 1-5 scale, with 1 = not at all appropriate and 5 = very appropriate. The total scale range is 4-20. Each group will be compared on the degree they find the specific clinical skill acceptable to use after they complete the training. We administered the AIM twice asking the students to respond to the acceptability of goal setting as a clinical skill and of identifying challenges as a clinical skill. This section reports on goal setting.
TERMINATED
NA
25 participants
This measure will be administered to participants in each training group after they complete the 25 hours of training.
2022-07-26
Participant Flow
Participant milestones
| Measure |
Traditional Training
25 hours of didactic and simulated case role play training in CBT principles, depression assessment and cultural competency.
Traditional Training: Training using didactics and role plays
|
ITS Based Training
Traditional training plus the addition of an algorithmic based training computer program that trains clinicians in clinical micro-competencies.
ITS based training: Training using computerized adaptive training in addition to role play
|
|---|---|---|
|
Overall Study
STARTED
|
10
|
15
|
|
Overall Study
COMPLETED
|
8
|
11
|
|
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
|
2
|
4
|
Reasons for withdrawal
Withdrawal data not reported
Baseline Characteristics
Remote Training in Evidence-based Practices for Clinicians Who Work With Migrant Workers
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
Traditional Training
n=8 Participants
24 hours of didactic and simulated case role play training in CBT principles, depression assessment and cultural competency.
Traditional Training: Training using didactics and role plays
|
ITS Based Training
n=11 Participants
Traditional training plus the addition of an algorithmic based training computer program that trains clinicians in clinical micro-competencies.
ITS based training: Training using computerized adaptive training in addition to role play
|
Total
n=19 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Age, Continuous
|
26.63 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.61 • n=5 Participants
|
24.09 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.63 • n=7 Participants
|
24.74 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.82 • n=5 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Female
|
8 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
9 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
17 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Male
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
|
8 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
4 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
12 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
7 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
7 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
|
8 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
8 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
16 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: This measure will be administered to participants in each training group after they complete the 25 hours of training.This is a four item measure of intervention acceptability; where each item is rated on a 1-5 scale, with 1 = not at all appropriate and 5 = very appropriate. The total scale range is 4-20. Each group will be compared on the degree they find the specific clinical skill acceptable to use after they complete the training. We administered the AIM twice asking the students to respond to the acceptability of goal setting as a clinical skill and of identifying challenges as a clinical skill. This section reports on goal setting.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Traditional Training
n=8 Participants
25 hours of didactic and simulated case role play training in CBT principles, depression assessment and cultural competency.
Traditional Training: Training using didactics and role plays
|
ITS Based Training
n=11 Participants
Traditional training plus the addition of an algorithmic based training computer program that trains clinicians in clinical micro-competencies.
ITS based training: Training using computerized adaptive training in addition to role play
|
|---|---|---|
|
Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM) - Goal Setting
Pre-Training
|
17.88 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.99
|
17.64 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.43
|
|
Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM) - Goal Setting
Post-Training
|
17.63 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.69
|
18.27 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.61
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: This measure will be administered to participants in each training group after they complete the 25 hours of training.This is a four item measure of intervention acceptability; where each item is rated on a 1-5 scale, with 1 = not at all appropriate and 5 = very appropriate. The total scale range is 4-20. Each group will be compared on the degree they find the specific clinical skill acceptable to use after they complete the training. We administered the AIM twice asking the students to respond to the acceptability of goal setting as a clinical skill and of identifying challenges as a clinical skill. This section reports on identifying challenges.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Traditional Training
n=8 Participants
25 hours of didactic and simulated case role play training in CBT principles, depression assessment and cultural competency.
Traditional Training: Training using didactics and role plays
|
ITS Based Training
n=11 Participants
Traditional training plus the addition of an algorithmic based training computer program that trains clinicians in clinical micro-competencies.
ITS based training: Training using computerized adaptive training in addition to role play
|
|---|---|---|
|
Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM) - Identifying Challenges
Pre-Training
|
16.75 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.39
|
17.73 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.44
|
|
Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM) - Identifying Challenges
Post-Training
|
16.25 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.28
|
17.82 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.72
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: This measure will be administered to participants in each training group after they complete the 25 hours of training.This is a four item measure of intervention appropriateness; where each item is rated on a 1-5 scale, with 1 = not at all appropriate and 5 = very appropriate. The total range for this measure is 4-20. Each group will be compared on the degree they find the specific clinical skill appropriate to use after they complete the training. We administered the IAM twice asking the students to respond to the acceptability of goal setting as a clinical skill and of identifying challenges as a clinical skill. This section reports on goal setting.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Traditional Training
n=8 Participants
25 hours of didactic and simulated case role play training in CBT principles, depression assessment and cultural competency.
Traditional Training: Training using didactics and role plays
|
ITS Based Training
n=11 Participants
Traditional training plus the addition of an algorithmic based training computer program that trains clinicians in clinical micro-competencies.
ITS based training: Training using computerized adaptive training in addition to role play
|
|---|---|---|
|
Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM) - Goal Setting
Pre-Training
|
18.25 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.75
|
18.55 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.63
|
|
Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM) - Goal Setting
Post-Training
|
17.88 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.23
|
18.82 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.54
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: This measure will be administered to participants in each training group after they complete the 25 hours of training.This is a four item measure of intervention appropriateness; where each item is rated on a 1-5 scale, with 1 = not at all appropriate and 5 = very appropriate. The total scale range is 4-20. Each group will be compared on the degree they find the specific clinical skill appropriate to use after they complete the training. We administered the IAM twice asking the students to respond to the acceptability of goal setting as a clinical skill and of identifying challenges as a clinical skill. This section reports on identifying challenges.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Traditional Training
n=8 Participants
25 hours of didactic and simulated case role play training in CBT principles, depression assessment and cultural competency.
Traditional Training: Training using didactics and role plays
|
ITS Based Training
n=11 Participants
Traditional training plus the addition of an algorithmic based training computer program that trains clinicians in clinical micro-competencies.
ITS based training: Training using computerized adaptive training in addition to role play
|
|---|---|---|
|
Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM) - Identifying Challenges
Pre-Training
|
16.38 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.19
|
18.82 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.27
|
|
Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM) - Identifying Challenges
Post-Training
|
17.13 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.81
|
18.27 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.90
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: This measure will be administered to participants in each training group after they complete the 25 hours of training.This is a four item measure of intervention feasibility; where each item is rated on a 1-5 scale, with 1 = not at all appropriate and 5 = very appropriate. The total scale range is 4-20. Each group will be compared on the degree they find the specific clinical skill feasible to use after they complete the training they participated in. We administered the FIM twice asking the students to respond to the feasibility of goal setting as a clinical skill and of identifying challenges as a clinical skill. This section reports on goal setting.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Traditional Training
n=8 Participants
25 hours of didactic and simulated case role play training in CBT principles, depression assessment and cultural competency.
Traditional Training: Training using didactics and role plays
|
ITS Based Training
n=11 Participants
Traditional training plus the addition of an algorithmic based training computer program that trains clinicians in clinical micro-competencies.
ITS based training: Training using computerized adaptive training in addition to role play
|
|---|---|---|
|
Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM) - Goal Setting
Pre-Training
|
16.88 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.23
|
17.09 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.17
|
|
Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM) - Goal Setting
Post-Training
|
17.13 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.46
|
18.91 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.64
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: This measure will be administered to participants in each training group after they complete the 25 hours of training.This is a four item measure of intervention feasibility; where each item is rated on a 1-5 scale, with 1 = not at all appropriate and 5 = very appropriate. The total scale range is 4-20. Each group will be compared on the degree they find the specific clinical skill feasible to use after they complete the training they participated in. We administered the FIM twice asking the students to respond to the feasibility of goal setting as a clinical skill and of identifying challenges as a clinical skill. This section reports on identifying challenges.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Traditional Training
n=8 Participants
25 hours of didactic and simulated case role play training in CBT principles, depression assessment and cultural competency.
Traditional Training: Training using didactics and role plays
|
ITS Based Training
n=11 Participants
Traditional training plus the addition of an algorithmic based training computer program that trains clinicians in clinical micro-competencies.
ITS based training: Training using computerized adaptive training in addition to role play
|
|---|---|---|
|
Feasibility of Intervention Measure - Identifying Challenges
Pre-Training
|
15.88 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.30
|
17.73 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.45
|
|
Feasibility of Intervention Measure - Identifying Challenges
Post-Training
|
15.63 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.69
|
18.27 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.68
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: This measure will be administered to participants in each training group after they complete the 25 hours of training.The IUS is a 10-item measure with a possible total score ranging from 0 to 100; higher scores indicate a more usable intervention. Although this measure has not yet been normed as a measure of intervention usability, the System Usability Scale upon which the IUS is based defines scores of 70 or above as indicative of acceptable usability.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Traditional Training
n=8 Participants
25 hours of didactic and simulated case role play training in CBT principles, depression assessment and cultural competency.
Traditional Training: Training using didactics and role plays
|
ITS Based Training
n=11 Participants
Traditional training plus the addition of an algorithmic based training computer program that trains clinicians in clinical micro-competencies.
ITS based training: Training using computerized adaptive training in addition to role play
|
|---|---|---|
|
Intervention Usability Scale (IUS) - Goal Setting
Pre-Training
|
28.25 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.85
|
28.27 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.61
|
|
Intervention Usability Scale (IUS) - Goal Setting
Post-Training
|
30.13 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.03
|
30.82 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 4.02
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: This measure will be administered to participants in each training group after they complete the 25 hours of training.The IUS is a 10-item measure with a possible total score ranging from 0 to 100; higher scores indicate a more usable intervention. Although this measure has not yet been normed as a measure of intervention usability, the System Usability Scale upon which the IUS is based defines scores of 70 or above as indicative of acceptable usability.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Traditional Training
n=8 Participants
25 hours of didactic and simulated case role play training in CBT principles, depression assessment and cultural competency.
Traditional Training: Training using didactics and role plays
|
ITS Based Training
n=11 Participants
Traditional training plus the addition of an algorithmic based training computer program that trains clinicians in clinical micro-competencies.
ITS based training: Training using computerized adaptive training in addition to role play
|
|---|---|---|
|
Intervention Usability Scale (IUS) - Identifying Challenges
Pre-Training
|
26.75 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 4.30
|
27.91 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 4.55
|
|
Intervention Usability Scale (IUS) - Identifying Challenges
Post-Training
|
28.88 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 4.09
|
29.27 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.10
|
Adverse Events
Traditional Training
ITS Based Training
Serious adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Other adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Additional Information
Dr. Patricia Arean, Director, UW ALACRITY Center
University of Washington, Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
- Publication restrictions are in place