Motivations to like, save and retweet on Twitter.

<p>Motivations to like, save and retweet on Twitter.</p

The role of Twitter in online scholarly communication.

<p>The role of Twitter in online scholarly communication.</p

A Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating a Manualized TeleCoaching Protocol for Improving Adherence to a Web-Based Intervention for the Treatment of Depression

<div><p>Background</p><p>Web-based interventions for depression that are supported by coaching have generally produced larger effect-sizes, relative to standalone web-based interventions. This is likely due to the effect of coaching on adherence. We evaluated the efficacy of a manualized telephone coaching intervention (TeleCoach) aimed at improving adherence to a web-based intervention (moodManager), as well as the relationship between adherence and depressive symptom outcomes.</p><p>Methods</p><p>101 patients with MDD, recruited from primary care, were randomized to 12 weeks moodManager+TeleCoach, 12 weeks of self-directed moodManager, or 6 weeks of a waitlist control (WLC). Depressive symptom severity was measured using the PHQ-9.</p><p>Results</p><p>TeleCoach+moodManager, compared to self-directed moodManager, resulted in significantly greater numbers of login days (<i>p</i> = 0.01), greater time until last use (<i>p</i> = 0.007), greater use of lessons (<i>p</i> = 0.03), greater variety of interactive tools used (<i>p</i> = 0.02), but total instances of tool use did not reach statistical significance. (<i>p</i> = 0.07). TeleCoach+moodManager produced significantly lower PHQ-9 scores relative to WLC at week 6 (<i>p</i> = 0.04), but there were no other significant differences in PHQ-9 scores at weeks 6 or 12 (<i>p</i>s>0.20) across treatment arms. Baseline PHQ-9 scores were no significantly related to adherence to moodManager.</p><p>Conclusions</p><p>TeleCoach produced significantly greater adherence to moodManager, relative to self-directed moodManager. TeleCoached moodManager produced greater reductions in depressive symptoms relative to WLC, however, there were no statistically significant differences relative to self-directed moodManager. While greater use was associated with better outcomes, most users in both TeleCoach and self-directed moodManager had dropped out of treatment by week 12. Even with telephone coaching, adherence to web-based interventions for depression remains a challenge. Methods of improving coaching models are discussed.</p><p>Trial Registration</p><p>Clinicaltrials.gov <a href="http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00719979?term=NCT00719979&rank=1" target="_blank">NCT00719979</a></p></div

Flow of study participants through the trial.

<p>Flow of study participants through the trial.</p

Least square means and standard errors for PHQ-9 depression symptom severity scores.

<p>Least square means and standard errors for PHQ-9 depression symptom severity scores.</p

Comparison of Three Quality of Life Instruments in Lymphatic Filariasis: DLQI, WHODAS 2.0, and LFSQQ

<div><p>Background</p><p>The Global Program to Eliminate Lymphatic Filariasis aims to interrupt transmission of lymphatic filariasis and manage morbidity in people currently living with the disease. A component of morbidity management is improving health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients. Measurement of HRQoL in current management programs is varied because of the lack of a standard HRQoL tool for use in the lymphatic filariasis population.</p><p>Methodology/Principal Findings</p><p>In this study, the psychometric properties of three health status measures were compared when used in a group of lymphatic filariasis patients and healthy controls. The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0), the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), and the Lymphatic Filariasis Quality of Life Questionnaire (LFSQQ) were administered to 36 stage II and stage III lymphatic filariasis subjects and 36 age and sex matched controls in Kerala, India. All three tools yielded missing value rates lower than 10%, suggesting high feasibility. Highest internal consistency was seen in the LFSQQ (α = 0.97). Discriminant validity analysis demonstrated that HRQoL was significantly lower in the LF group than in controls for the WHODAS 2.0, DLQI, and LFSQQ, but total HRQoL scores did not differ between stage II and stage III lymphedema subjects. The LFSQQ total score correlated most strongly with the WHODAS 2.0 (r = 0.91, p<0.001) and DLQI (r = 0.81, p<0.001).</p><p>Conclusions/Significance</p><p>The WHODAS 2.0, DLQI, and LFSQQ demonstrate acceptable feasibility, internal consistency, discriminate validity, and construct validity. Based on our psychometric analyses, the LFSQQ performs the best and is recommended for use in the lymphatic filariasis population.</p></div

Spearman correlation coefficients among the domains of LFSQQ and DLQI.

*<p>Not significantly different from zero.</p><p>Strong correlations are bolded.</p

WHODAS 2.0, DLQI, and LFSQQ score distribution.

<p>Median value is given and 25^th–75^th quartiles in parentheses.</p

LF subjects' disease characteristics.

<p>LF subjects' disease characteristics.</p

Missing values and internal consistency.

<p>Number in parentheses indicates number of items.</p