Digital Media Literacy Group for Adolescents in Child and Adolescent Psychiatry: Prospective Multicenter Single-Arm Feasibility Study.
Digital media literacy (DML) may help adolescents to handle online risks, misinformation, digital violence, and problematic media use more reflectively. However, structured interventions for adolescents in child and adolescent psychiatry (CAP), particularly in inpatient and day-treatment settings, remain scarce.
This study evaluated the feasibility, acceptability, and perceived usefulness of a manualized DML group for adolescents in CAP and explored preliminary changes in digital self-efficacy and critical media literacy (CML).
A prospective single-arm feasibility study with an embedded pretest-posttest and session-level process evaluation was conducted across 3 CAP clinics in Germany. The intervention comprised 6 weekly 60-minute, manualized modules covering data protection, social media use, and digital violence. Sessions were delivered in an open-group format by trained clinical staff. Recruitment was embedded in routine care, and clinical group participation was independent of study evaluation. Adolescents and facilitators completed paper-and-pencil questionnaires at baseline (T1), after each session, and post intervention or discharge (T2). Analyses were primarily descriptive; exploratory pre-post analyses used paired t tests.
The analytic feasibility sample comprised 121 adolescents who attended at least 1 module. T1 data were available for n=60 and T2 data for n=38. Overall, adolescents attended a median of 2 modules (IQR 1-3; mean 2.46, SD 1.65, range 1-6), and 45 attended at least 3 modules. Session-level ratings indicated moderate to high acceptability. Facilitator-rated manual fidelity was moderate to high. Retrospective T2 ratings indicated moderate to high helpfulness (n=38; mean 3.55, SD 1.18; median 4.0, IQR 3.0-4.0) and satisfaction (n=38; mean 3.79, SD 1.07; median 4.0, IQR 3.0-5.0), with no significant differences between completers and noncompleters for helpfulness (U=125.00; P=.60) or satisfaction (U=122.00; P=.53). Among completers (≥3 modules and T2 data; n=28), didactic method acceptability was moderate (mean 2.85, SD 0.60), and perceived learning was moderate to high (mean 3.33, SD 0.95). Exploratory pre-post analyses indicated an increase in perceived self-efficacy for recognizing misinformation (n=21; T1 mean 2.94, SD 0.59; T2 mean 3.38, SD 0.63; t20=2.58; Hedges g=0.56, 95% CI 0.09-1.02; P=.02). Overall CML increased descriptively (P=.07), whereas digital media self-efficacy did not change significantly (P=.27).
Our manualized DML group was feasible and acceptable in routine CAP. Open-group delivery and variable treatment stays limited intervention exposure and data completeness. Findings suggest that brief DML groups may address safety- and knowledge-oriented competencies, but controlled mixed methods studies with systematic recruitment and missing-data documentation are needed.
This study evaluated the feasibility, acceptability, and perceived usefulness of a manualized DML group for adolescents in CAP and explored preliminary changes in digital self-efficacy and critical media literacy (CML).
A prospective single-arm feasibility study with an embedded pretest-posttest and session-level process evaluation was conducted across 3 CAP clinics in Germany. The intervention comprised 6 weekly 60-minute, manualized modules covering data protection, social media use, and digital violence. Sessions were delivered in an open-group format by trained clinical staff. Recruitment was embedded in routine care, and clinical group participation was independent of study evaluation. Adolescents and facilitators completed paper-and-pencil questionnaires at baseline (T1), after each session, and post intervention or discharge (T2). Analyses were primarily descriptive; exploratory pre-post analyses used paired t tests.
The analytic feasibility sample comprised 121 adolescents who attended at least 1 module. T1 data were available for n=60 and T2 data for n=38. Overall, adolescents attended a median of 2 modules (IQR 1-3; mean 2.46, SD 1.65, range 1-6), and 45 attended at least 3 modules. Session-level ratings indicated moderate to high acceptability. Facilitator-rated manual fidelity was moderate to high. Retrospective T2 ratings indicated moderate to high helpfulness (n=38; mean 3.55, SD 1.18; median 4.0, IQR 3.0-4.0) and satisfaction (n=38; mean 3.79, SD 1.07; median 4.0, IQR 3.0-5.0), with no significant differences between completers and noncompleters for helpfulness (U=125.00; P=.60) or satisfaction (U=122.00; P=.53). Among completers (≥3 modules and T2 data; n=28), didactic method acceptability was moderate (mean 2.85, SD 0.60), and perceived learning was moderate to high (mean 3.33, SD 0.95). Exploratory pre-post analyses indicated an increase in perceived self-efficacy for recognizing misinformation (n=21; T1 mean 2.94, SD 0.59; T2 mean 3.38, SD 0.63; t20=2.58; Hedges g=0.56, 95% CI 0.09-1.02; P=.02). Overall CML increased descriptively (P=.07), whereas digital media self-efficacy did not change significantly (P=.27).
Our manualized DML group was feasible and acceptable in routine CAP. Open-group delivery and variable treatment stays limited intervention exposure and data completeness. Findings suggest that brief DML groups may address safety- and knowledge-oriented competencies, but controlled mixed methods studies with systematic recruitment and missing-data documentation are needed.
Authors
Petras Petras, Wüllner Wüllner, Hermenau Hermenau, Meerkamp Meerkamp, Siniatchkin Siniatchkin
View on Pubmed