@Article{info:doi/10.2196/40509,
author="Ramos, Giovanni
and Montoya, Amanda Kay
and Hammons, Hayley Renee
and Smith, Danielle
and Chavira, Denise April
and Rith-Najarian, Leslie Rose",
title="Digital Intervention Barriers Scale--7 (DIBS-7): Development, Evaluation, and Preliminary Validation",
journal="JMIR Form Res",
year="2023",
month="Apr",
day="6",
volume="7",
pages="e40509",
keywords="barriers; development; digital mental health intervention; measure; psychometrics; scale; validation",
abstract="Background: The translation of mental health services into digital formats, deemed digital mental health interventions (DMHIs), has the potential to address long-standing obstacles to accessing care. However, DMHIs have barriers of their own that impact enrollment, adherence, and attrition in these programs. Unlike in traditional face-to-face therapy, there is a paucity of standardized and validated measures of barriers in DMHIs. Objective: In this study, we describe the preliminary development and evaluation of such a scale, the Digital Intervention Barriers Scale-7 (DIBS-7). Methods: Following an iterative QUAN {\textrightarrow} QUAL mixed methods approach, item generation was guided by qualitative analysis of feedback from participants (n=259) who completed a DMHI trial for anxiety and depression and identified barriers related to self-motivation, ease of use, acceptability, and comprehension of tasks. Item refinement was achieved through DMHI expert review. A final item pool was administered to 559 treatment completers (mean age 23.02 years; 438/559, 78.4{\%} female; 374/559, 69.9{\%} racially or ethnically minoritized). Exploratory factor analyses and confirmatory factor analyses were estimated to determine the psychometric properties of the measure. Finally, criterion-related validity was examined by estimating partial correlations between the DIBS-7 mean score and constructs related to treatment engagement in DMHIs. Results: Statistical analyses estimated a 7-item unidimensional scale with high internal consistency ($\alpha$=.82, $\omega$=0.89). Preliminary criterion-related validity was supported by significant partial correlations between the DIBS-7 mean score and treatment expectations (pr=--0.25), number of modules with activity (pr=--0.55), number of weekly check-ins (pr=--0.28), and treatment satisfaction (pr=--0.71). Conclusions: Overall, these results provide preliminary support for the use of the DIBS-7 as a potentially useful short scale for clinicians and researchers interested in measuring an important variable often associated with treatment adherence and outcomes in DMHIs. ",
issn="2561-326X",
doi="10.2196/40509",
url="https://formative.jmir.org/2023/1/e40509",
url="https://doi.org/10.2196/40509",
url="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37023417"
}