Reasons police respond in schools: An analysis of narrative data from police incident reports.

BACKGROUND: Communities across the U.S. have acted to eliminate or curb police presence in schools. These efforts have primarily focused on School Resource Officers. However, school staff also call upon local police to respond in their buildings, for example by calling 911. The reasons that police are called upon to respond in schools has rarely been studied. OBJECTIVE: The current study aimed to identify the primary reasons that local police were asked to respond to incidents in one urban school district, and the outcomes of those responses. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: We analyzed 882 police incident report narratives, selected from a stratified sample of 57 schools in one urban school district during the 2017-18 school year. Incident reports, which were written by officers responding in schools, included narrative descriptions of officer intervention, the events precipitating police involvement, and outcomes of incidents. METHODS: By coding incident report narratives, we identified categories describing the reasons for police response to events in schools and the outcomes of those events. RESULTS: Most incident reports originating from school addresses (n = 730; 82.8 %) involved students. Among those reports, police most frequently responded to instances of sexual physical violence (17.5 %), physical assault (15.8 %), dysregulated behavior (11.2 %), threatening language (10.8 %), and threat of or actual school violence (4.4 %). Incidents involving students most often resulted in: (1) parents/guardians being contacted (57.3 %), (2) schools engaging in disciplinary actions (39.7 %) or school safety actions (27.0 %), and (3) child maltreatment reports being made to Crimes Against Children (a subdivision of the police department focused on child maltreatment; 26.0 %) or to the Department of Children and Families (26.2 %). CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that many events leading to police responses in schools are related to maltreatment and behavioral health. These events rarely result in a criminal justice response, and most often result in action by families and schools (e.g., contacting parents/guardians, school disciplinary/safety actions), and filed reports of maltreatment. Additional supports in these areas may have the potential to reduce the perceived need to call upon police and to provide more direct access to services for students.

Comparing usage of a web and app stress management intervention: An observational study.

Choices in the design and delivery of digital health behaviour interventions may have a direct influence on subsequent usage and engagement. Few studies have been able to make direct, detailed comparisons of differences in usage between interventions that are delivered via web or app. This study compared the usage of two versions of a digital stress management intervention, one delivered via a website (Healthy Paths) and the other delivered via an app (Healthy Mind). Design modifications were introduced within Healthy Mind to take account of reported differences in how individuals engage with websites compared to apps and mobile phones. Data were collected as part of an observational study nested within a broader exploratory trial of Healthy Mind. Objective usage of Healthy Paths and Healthy Mind were automatically recorded, including frequency and duration of logins, access to specific components within the intervention and order of page/screen visits. Usage was compared for a two week period following initial registration. In total, 381 participants completed the registration process for Healthy Paths (web) and 162 participants completed the registration process for Healthy Mind (app). App users logged in twice as often (Mdn = 2.00) as web users (Mdn = 1.00), U = 13,059.50, p ≤ 0.001, but spent half as much time (Mdn = 5.23 min) on the intervention compared to web users (Mdn = 10.52 min), U = 19,740.00, p ≤ 0.001. Visual exploration of usage patterns over time revealed that a significantly higher proportion of app users (n = 126, 82.35%) accessed both types of support available within the intervention (i.e. awareness and change-focused tools) compared to web users (n = 92, 40.17%), χ2(1, n = 382) = 66.60, p < 0.001. This study suggests that the digital platform used to deliver an intervention (i.e. web versus app) and specific design choices (e.g. navigation, length and volume of content) may be associated with differences in how the intervention content is used. Broad summative usage data (e.g. total time spent on the intervention) may mask important differences in how an intervention is used by different user groups if it is not complemented by more fine-grained analyses of usage patterns over time. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN67177737.

Correction: The Effect of Timing and Frequency of Push Notifications on Usage of a Smartphone-Based Stress Management Intervention: An Exploratory Trial.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169162.].

The Effect of Timing and Frequency of Push Notifications on Usage of a Smartphone-Based Stress Management Intervention: An Exploratory Trial.

Push notifications offer a promising strategy for enhancing engagement with smartphone-based health interventions. Intelligent sensor-driven machine learning models may improve the timeliness of notifications by adapting delivery to a user's current context (e.g. location). This exploratory mixed-methods study examined the potential impact of timing and frequency on notification response and usage of Healthy Mind, a smartphone-based stress management intervention. 77 participants were randomised to use one of three versions of Healthy Mind that provided: intelligent notifications; daily notifications within pre-defined time frames; or occasional notifications within pre-defined time frames. Notification response and Healthy Mind usage were automatically recorded. Telephone interviews explored participants' experiences of using Healthy Mind. Participants in the intelligent and daily conditions viewed (d = .47, .44 respectively) and actioned (d = .50, .43 respectively) more notifications compared to the occasional group. Notification group had no meaningful effects on percentage of notifications viewed or usage of Healthy Mind. No meaningful differences were indicated between the intelligent and non-intelligent groups. Our findings suggest that frequent notifications may encourage greater exposure to intervention content without deterring engagement, but adaptive tailoring of notification timing does not always enhance their use. Hypotheses generated from this study require testing in future work. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN67177737.