ObjectiveThis pilot study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a digital cognitive behavioral therapy in patients with cancer experiencing sleep problems.MethodsA total of 57 participants aged 25–65 years were randomly assigned to three groups—21 participants to a dCBT program, 20 participants to an app-based attentional control program, and 16 participants to a waitlist control group—and evaluated offline before and after the program completion. Of the 57 participants, there were a total of 45 study completers, 15 participants in each group. The (...) dependent variables were sleep quality scores, measured by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and health-related quality of life scores, measured using the Short-Form 36, and attentional bias scores from a dot-probe computer task.ResultsFor both the intention-to-treat and study-completers analyses, a significant increase supported by a large effect size was found in the quality of sleep score of the HARUToday Sleep group compared to both the app-based attentional control and the waitlist control group. However, no significant changes were found in the quality of life and attentional bias scores.ConclusionOur results suggest that the HARUToday Sleep app has the potential to serve as an intervention module to enhance the sleep quality of patients with cancer experiencing sleep problems. (shrink)

Group contingency (GC) is an effective and cost-efficient strategy that can be successfully applied to technology-based interventions. This study examined the relative effectiveness and cost efficiency of three types of technology-based group contingencies on walking among adults. Seventy two students were divided into teams of three. Each team was randomly assigned to one of three GC conditions (independent, interdependent, or dependent) and underwent 66 days of technology-based group contingency intervention. Sixty five participants completed the intervention and 61 completed the follow-up (...) assessment 2 months later. Step counts and self-reported walking activity increased after the intervention under all three conditions. The proportion of participants that met the target step counts was significantly higher under the dependent group contingency condition. However, 2 months later, intervention effects were not maintained under any condition. For cost efficiency, the increase in step count per point was significantly higher under the interdependent group contingency condition. Group cohesion and social validity (point satisfaction and point utility) were significantly higher under the dependent group contingency condition. Finally, the clinical implications and limitations of this study are discussed. (shrink)