An interventional study of Tablet TRAC Emotion Regulation Intervention in Risk Behavior, Risk Reduction and Emotion Regulation, sponsored by Rhode Island Hospital. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 12 Years to 14 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2019-12-06.
Sponsored by Rhode Island Hospital · Not applicable, Interventional, and Prevention
This study will take a group-based intervention for adolescents that reduced sexual risk behavior and create a computer-based version, which is a format that adolescents like and that is more cost-effective. The intervention focuses on teaching adolescents skills for managing their emotions when they are making decisions that could put them at risk (like whether to have sex or drink alcohol). The investigators are hoping to learn whether a computer version of the program will be useful in helping adolescents learn about emotional competence and reducing risky behaviors. The investigators will make a version of the intervention as games on tablet computers in a partnership with a technology company, Klein Buendel. The research team will begin by getting advice from adolescents and experts (in separate groups) about how to convey the ideas from the group program into computer games. Klein Buendel will then create the games. Then, about 10 adolescents will be asked to try out the program and give us feedback about things to change. Klein Buendel will make those changes. Then the investigators will ask about 100 adolescents to volunteer to be randomly placed in one of two groups. One group will do the computer program right away; the other will wait for three months. Both groups will be asked to answer questions and do computer tasks when the team meets them, one month later, and three months later. The investigators will compare the groups to see if the group that received the computer intervention reports being more emotionally competent than the group that has not yet done the computer intervention. The research team will also ask them about their risk behaviors. If this is useful, it may be a good way to enhance health education taught in schools.
Emotion regulation in adolescence is associated with health risk behaviors, including sex and substance use, and early onset of these behaviors represents a risk factor for negative health outcomes throughout life. Thus, interventions appropriate for early adolescence, when these behaviors commonly begin, are critical for prevention efforts. The research team has developed and tested a novel, engaging, and efficacious intervention that addresses emotion regulation, a theoretically important and under-researched factor associated with risk. The efficacy trial of this intervention, Project TRAC, showed that an intervention strategy using emotion regulation was significantly more successful than an active comparison condition on the primary target, delaying onset of sexual activity over a two and a half year follow-up, as well as on other risk behaviors, such as condom use, fighting, and partner violence. While efficacious, the current face-to-face, small group format of the program is a difficult model to sustain and implement on a larger scale. With a long-term goal toward dissemination, this two-year project will translate the emotion regulation components of this successful program for tablet-based delivery to enable it to reach a large audience in a format that can be related to a variety of health behavior education topics (e.g., sexual health, violence, substance use). For the proposed project, the Rhode Island Hospital/ Brown University research team will collaborate with Klein Buendel, a health communications technology company, to translate the emotion regulation content of Project TRAC for tablet computers. This translation, using well-established theoretical frameworks, will be approached in consultation with members of the target population (early adolescents) and experts in the field. After the intervention has been translated to a tablet form, ten adolescents will test the program to assess acceptability and usability. Finally, a small pilot study (n=100) will assess feasibility of the translated intervention and compare it to a waitlist control group.
136 studies on the registry are indexed under Risk-Taking; 18 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 85 is below the median of 255 across 117 interventional studies indexed under Risk-Taking.
Browse Risk-Taking studies →Rhode Island Hospital is the lead sponsor of 191 studies on the registry; 36 are open to participants now.
Of its 12 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 2 (17%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Behavioral: Tablet TRAC Emotion Regulation Intervention
Control participants are assessed on the same schedule as the treatment condition and offered the intervention after the 3-month follow-up
The intervention focuses on developmentally appropriate strategies for emotion regulation during difficult situations, particularly those related to risk, using 3 primary groups of strategies identified during qualitative work in Project TRAC (R34 MH078750): 1) getting away (physically or cognitively) from triggers for strong emotions, 2) releasing emotional energy in healthy ways (physically or verbally) or 3) changing cognitions and appraisals about emotional triggers. Using strategies effective in TRAC, teens will engage in games to practice and apply strategies to risk scenarios, as well as personalize content learned.
Emotion Regulation/Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale
Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale- The Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (36 items) uses 6 subscales (all α \> .80) to assess perceptions of skill in ER, awareness, and impulse control based on Linehan's theoretical work. The six subscales are: 1. Nonacceptance of emotional response (6 items) 2. Difficulties engaging in goal directed behavior \[goals\] (5 items) 3. Impulse control difficulties \[impulse\] (6 items) 4. Lack of emotion awareness \[awareness\] (6 items) 5. Limited access to emotion regulation strategies \[strategies\] (8 items) 6. Lack of emotional clarity \[clarity\]. (5 items) Participants rate their responses on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (almost never)- 5 (almost always). The total score is calculated from the sum of all the items, with higher scores indicating greater problems with emotion regulation. (Total possible range: 36-180)
Time frame: baseline- 3 month follow up
Emotion Recognition/DANVA
Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal Accuracy-2 (DANVA2) is a computer-based measure that asks participants to identify the emotion of facial expressions displayed in a series of 24 photographs and in 24 oral presentations of a neutral sentence, with higher scores indicating higher accuracy of emotion recognition. Total possible range = 0-48.
Time frame: Baseline-3 month follow up
Emotion Regulation/Emotion Regulation Checklist
The Emotion Regulation Checklist contains 24 items on a 4-point Likert scale (1=never through 4= almost always; Total Range: 15-360). Parents rate 24 behavioral descriptions, yielding 2 subscales: 1) Lability/Negativity (α= .95), and 2) Emotion Regulation (α=.84). The Emotion Regulation subscale contains 8 items, while the Lability/Negativity scale contains 15 items. Higher scores on the Lability/Negativity scale indicate higher inflexibility, emotional reactivity, and dysregulated negative affect; higher scores on the emotion regulation subscale indicate greater situationally appropriate affective displays, empathy, and emotional self-awareness (Shields \& Cicchetti, 1997). Alphas for the subscales are good (L/N α = .96; ER α = .83). One single measurement of emotion regulation is generated from the overall scores in both sub-scales (α = .89; Shields \& Cicchetti, 1997).
Time frame: baseline-3 month follow up
Emotion Regulation/ The Regulation of Emotions Questionnaire
The Regulation of Emotions Questionnaire\* (21 items) assesses frequency of use of both functional and dysfunctional emotion regulation strategies (α= \>.66). Participants rate their responses on a 5-point Likert scale from 1- "never" through 5- "always". (Total Range: 21-110). Higher scores indicate higher frequency of use of emotion regulation strategies.
Time frame: baseline-3 month follow up
Emotion Regulation/Self Efficacy Questionnaire for Children
The Emotional Self-efficacy subscale of the Self-Efficacy Questionnaire for Children (8 items) assesses perception of one's ability to cope with negative emotions (α= .83). It has been shown to be valid, reliable, and related to risk behaviors among US adolescents. Subjects rate their responses on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 "not at all" through 5 "very well". (Range: 8-40, with lower scores indicating low perception of ability to cope with negative emotions).
Time frame: baseline-3 month follow-up
Emotion Regulation/Emotion Regulation Behavior Scale
The Emotion Regulation Behaviors Scale (8 items) measures use of the specific emotion regulation strategies taught in Project TRAC (α= .73). Participants respond on a scale of 1 (never) to 5 (all the time) across 8 items, with higher scores indicating more regulatory behaviors (range: 8-40).
Time frame: baseline-3 month follow up
Emotion Regulation/Affect Dysregulation Scale
The Affect Dysregulation Scale contains 6 items used to assess frequency of difficulty with affect regulation on 4-point Likert scale from 1=not at all to 4=often (α= .72), with higher scores indicating more difficulty managing feelings. affect (range: 6-36).
Time frame: baseline-3 month follow up
Assessment Risk Behavior/Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System
7 items taken from the Center for Disease Control's Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System will be used to assess adolescents' engagement in substance use, violence, and other risk behaviors. Participants will be asked risk behavior questions similar to the following item: "During the past 30 days, on how many days did you smoke cigarettes?" with answer choices ranging from 0, 1-2, 3-5, 6-9, 10-19, 20-29, 30.
Time frame: Baseline-3 month follow up
Distress Tolerance
Behavioral Indicator of Resiliency to Distress (BIRD) and Mirror Tracing Persistence Task (MTPT) are 5-minute computerized distress tolerance tasks that generate a score of time spent persisting on a dysregulating task that provides negative feedback (aversive noise) when users do not succeed at very challenging tasks, with more time spent on the tasks indicating greater distress tolerance. Possible range = 0-300 seconds.
Time frame: baseline-3 month follow up
Plan to share: Yes — After analyses are completed for the aims of the study, deidentified databases will be made available to qualified researchers through standard data sharing procedures.
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
Ran from Feb 2019 to primary completion in Oct 2019, 8 months.
Of 65 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Risk-Taking, half reached primary completion within 28 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 9 and three quarters within 48. This study's 8 months is below that.
Counting every sponsor, half of 68 studies reached it within 28 months; a quarter within 7 and three quarters within 49.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is completed, as verified in Feb 2019. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.