[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-study-detail:100658101":3},{"organization":4,"outcomesModule":7,"designInfo":55,"detailedDescription":63,"studyPopulation":60,"armGroups":64,"interventions":83,"overallOfficials":60,"centralContacts":89,"locations":95,"responsibleParty":111,"collaborators":115,"id":119,"slug":120,"hasResults":121,"nctId":122,"briefTitle":123,"officialTitle":124,"acronym":60,"eligibilityCriteria":125,"healthyVolunteers":126,"sex":127,"minAge":128,"maxAge":60,"enrollmentInfo":129,"targetDuration":60,"studyType":132,"phases":133,"briefSummary":135,"conditions":136,"keywords":140,"overallStatus":144,"whyStopped":60,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":145,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":146,"startDateStruct":149,"completionDateStruct":151,"leadSponsor":153,"locationsCount":154},{"fullName":5,"class":6},"University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Warsaw","OTHER",{"primaryOutcomes":8,"secondaryOutcomes":13,"otherOutcomes":26},[9],{"measure":10,"description":11,"timeFrame":12},"Perceived Stress","Perceived stress will be assessed using the 4-item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4). The scale measures the extent to which participants perceive their lives as unpredictable, uncontrollable, and overloaded. Items are rated on a 5-point scale from 0 (\"never\") to 4 (\"very often\"). Positively worded items are reverse scored, and item scores are summed. Higher scores indicate greater perceived stress.","Immediately after the 3-week intervention period (T2) and at the 6-month follow-up (T3).",[14,17,20,23],{"measure":15,"description":16,"timeFrame":12},"Work-to-Family Conflict (WFC)","Assessed using the multidimensional measure developed by Carlson et al. (2000). This specific outcome evaluates interference originating in the work domain and affecting family life. It measures time-based, strain-based, and behavior-based dimensions of conflict. Items are rated on a 5-point scale from 1 (\"strongly disagree\") to 5 (\"strongly agree\"). Higher scores indicate greater work-to-family conflict. Both composite scores and separate dimensional scores (time-based and strain-based) will be analyzed.",{"measure":18,"description":19,"timeFrame":12},"Family-to-Work Conflict (FWC)","Assessed using the multidimensional measure developed by Carlson et al. (2000). This specific outcome evaluates interference originating in the family domain and affecting work. It measures time-based, strain-based, and behavior-based dimensions of conflict. Items are rated on a 5-point scale from 1 (\"strongly disagree\") to 5 (\"strongly agree\"). Higher scores indicate greater family-to-work conflict. Both composite scores and separate dimensional scores (time-based and strain-based) will be analyzed.",{"measure":21,"description":22,"timeFrame":12},"Job Satisfaction","Assessed using the 3-item Satisfaction with Job Scale (Zalewska, 2003), which evaluates the cognitive appraisal of one's work life. Items are rated on a 7-point scale from 1 (\"strongly disagree\") to 7 (\"strongly agree\"). Higher scores indicate greater job satisfaction.",{"measure":24,"description":25,"timeFrame":12},"Family Satisfaction","Assessed using a 3-item scale adapted from the Satisfaction with Family Life Scale (Zabriskie \\& Ward, 2013) to evaluate cognitive satisfaction with family life. Items are rated on a 7-point scale from 1 (\"strongly disagree\") to 7 (\"strongly agree\"). Higher scores indicate greater family satisfaction.",[27,31,34,38,42,46,49,52],{"measure":28,"description":29,"timeFrame":30},"Self-Compassion","Assessed using the Polish adaptation of the Self-Compassion Scale Short Form (SCS-SF; 12 items). Evaluates self-kindness, common humanity, and mindfulness versus self-judgment, isolation, and over-identification. Items are rated on a 5-point scale from 1 (\"almost never\") to 5 (\"almost always\"). Higher scores indicate greater self-compassion.","Baseline (T1), immediately after the 3-week intervention period (T2) and at the 6-month follow-up (T3).",{"measure":32,"description":33,"timeFrame":30},"Segmentation and Integration Strategies","Assessed using 6 items adapted from Kossek et al. (2012) measuring nonwork interrupting work behaviors and work interrupting nonwork behaviors. Items are rated on a 5-point scale from 1 (\"strongly disagree\") to 5 (\"strongly agree\"). Higher scores reflect specific boundary management styles.",{"measure":35,"description":36,"timeFrame":37},"Intervention Credibility and Outcome Expectancy","Assessed using the Credibility\u002FExpectancy Questionnaire (CEQ; 6 items). Evaluates cognitive appraisal (credibility subscale) and beliefs about treatment outcome (expectancy subscale). Items 1-3 and 5 are rated on 9-point scales; items 4 and 6 are rated from 0% to 100%. Higher scores indicate higher credibility and expectancy.","Baseline (T1).",{"measure":39,"description":40,"timeFrame":41},"User Experience","Assessed using the short version of the User Experience Questionnaire (UEQ-S). Measures pragmatic aspects (clarity, efficiency) and hedonic aspects (stimulation, novelty) of the intervention platform.","Immediately after the 3-week intervention period (T2).",{"measure":43,"description":44,"timeFrame":45},"Intervention Adherence (Quantitative, Qualitative, and Subjective)","Intervention adherence will be evaluated using three complementary indices:\n\nQuantitative Adherence: The proportion of completed platform activities out of all assigned activities (score 0-1 or 0%-100%).\n\nQualitative Adherence: Rated by trained judges using activity-specific rubrics on a scale from 0 to 4 based on task congruence and reflection depth (0 = inadequate\u002FAI-generated without engagement; 4 = complete and highly task-congruent).\n\nSubjective Adherence: A weekly self-report item asking how carefully tasks were completed on a 5-point scale from 1 (\"not carefully at all\") to 5 (\"very carefully\"), averaged across weeks.","Weekly during the 3-week intervention period and immediately post-intervention (T2).",{"measure":47,"description":48,"timeFrame":45},"Affective Engagement","Assessed using an ultra-short adapted work engagement scale (3 items) rated on a 5-point scale from 1 (\"strongly disagree\") to 5 (\"strongly agree\"). Calculated as the mean of weekly ratings.",{"measure":50,"description":51,"timeFrame":41},"Intervention Fit (Acceptability, Appropriateness, Feasibility)","Assessed using 3 items (inspired by Weiner et al., 2017) measuring acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. Items are rated on a 5-point scale from 1 (\"completely disagree\") to 5 (\"completely agree\").",{"measure":53,"description":54,"timeFrame":41},"Dyadic Adherence and Engagement","Assessed using a short survey administered to participants in the active intervention platform to evaluate mutual participation and engagement in joint exercises (e.g., \"My partner actively engaged in joint exercises\").",{"allocation":56,"interventionModel":57,"interventionModelDescription":58,"primaryPurpose":59,"observationalModel":60,"timePerspective":60,"maskingInfo":61},"RANDOMIZED","PARALLEL","A four-arm, parallel-group randomized controlled trial where dual-earner couples are allocated to one of four conditions: a dyadic intervention, an individual female-partner intervention, an individual male-partner intervention, or a waitlist control condition.","TREATMENT",null,{"masking":62,"maskingDescription":60,"whoMasked":60},"NONE","Background and theoretical rationale: This study evaluates an internet-delivered psychological intervention for heterosexual dual-earner couples experiencing work-to-family conflict (WFC) and family-to-work conflict (FWC). Grounded in Greenhaus and Beutell's multidimensional framework and the Spillover-Crossover Model, the intervention targets time-based and strain-based interrole conflict. The dyadic randomized controlled design investigates individual (actor) effects and interpersonal (partner) crossover effects to test whether joint participation yields superior benefits compared to individual delivery or a waitlist control condition.\n\nStudy design and randomization: The study is a four-arm, parallel-group randomized controlled trial with the couple serving as the unit of recruitment and randomization. Couples are allocated using block randomization via the blockrand package in R with a 1.77:1.77:1 allocation ratio to one of four conditions. The conditions include a dyadic intervention, an individual female-partner intervention, an individual male-partner intervention, and a waitlist control condition.\n\nDigital platform and delivery: The unguided 3-week intervention is hosted on Google Classroom within an institutional Google Workspace for Education environment. To ensure participant privacy, a multiple-classroom architecture assigns each individual or dyad to a private virtual classroom accessible only via individual researcher-managed credentials. Native social communication features are disabled to prevent cross-participant visibility. Built-in automated email notifications serve as digital nudges to promote task engagement.\n\nIntervention structure: The intervention consists of two parallel strands addressing time-based and strain-based conflict. The time-based strand focuses on boundary management, segmentation and integration strategies, implementation intentions, and action planning. The strain-based strand emphasizes recognizing psychological strain transfer, self-distancing, emotional awareness, and behavioral experiments. The dyadic condition incorporates joint activities involving mutual reflection, structured dialogue, and collaborative support planning.\n\nStatistical analysis plan: Efficacy analyses will follow the intention-to-treat principle using linear mixed-effects models to evaluate fixed effects of time, condition, and their interaction. Nested random intercepts will account for repeated observations within participants and non-independence within couples. Dyadic crossover processes will be analyzed using the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model to differentiate actor associations from partner associations. Missing data will be handled via maximum likelihood estimation within mixed-effects models or multiple imputation depending on missingness patterns.",[65,71,75,79],{"label":66,"type":67,"description":68,"interventionNames":69},"Dyadic intervention condition","EXPERIMENTAL","Both partners in the dual-earner couple actively participate in the 3-week internet-delivered psychological intervention. Both partners complete assessments at all timepoints.",[70],"Behavioral: Internet-delivered psychological intervention for work-family conflict",{"label":72,"type":67,"description":73,"interventionNames":74},"Individual female-partner intervention condition","Only the female partner actively participates in the 3-week internet-delivered psychological intervention during the active trial phase. Both partners complete assessments at all timepoints.",[70],{"label":76,"type":67,"description":77,"interventionNames":78},"Individual male-partner intervention condition","Only the male partner actively participates in the 3-week internet-delivered psychological intervention during the active trial phase. Both partners complete assessments at all timepoints.",[70],{"label":80,"type":81,"description":82,"interventionNames":60},"Waitlist control condition","NO_INTERVENTION","Neither partner receives access to the intervention during the active trial phase. Both partners complete assessments at all timepoints. Participants in this group are offered access to the intervention materials after the final 6-month follow-up assessment.",[84],{"type":85,"name":86,"description":87,"armGroupLabels":88,"otherNames":60},"BEHAVIORAL","Internet-delivered psychological intervention for work-family conflict","An unguided, 3-week internet-delivered intervention hosted on Google Classroom. It aims to help dual-earner couples manage time-based and strain-based work-family conflict. The program comprises two parallel strands combining psychoeducation, boundary management strategies, self-compassion, emotional awareness, implementation intentions, and behavioral experiments. In the dyadic condition, it also includes joint exercises involving mutual reflection and communication.",[66,72,76],[90],{"name":91,"role":92,"phone":93,"phoneExt":60,"email":94},"Ewelina Smoktunowicz, PhD","CONTACT","+48 22 517 99 21","esmoktunowicz@swps.edu.pl",[96],{"facility":97,"status":60,"city":98,"state":99,"zip":100,"country":101,"countryCode":102,"cosmosGeoPoint":103,"geoPoint":108,"contacts":109},"SWPS University","Warsaw","Masovian Voivodeship","03-815","Poland","PL",{"type":104,"coordinates":105},"Point",[106,107],21.01178,52.22977,{"lat":107,"lon":106},[110],{"name":91,"role":92,"phone":93,"phoneExt":60,"email":94},{"type":112,"investigatorFullName":113,"investigatorTitle":114,"investigatorAffiliation":5,"oldNameTitle":60,"oldOrganization":60},"PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR","Ewelina Smoktunowicz","Associate Professor",[116],{"name":117,"class":118},"National Science Centre, Poland","OTHER_GOV","100658101","internet-intervention-for-well-being-and-work-family-conflict-in-dual-earner-couples-100658101",false,"NCT07845799","Internet Intervention for Well-Being and Work-Family Conflict in Dual-Earner Couples","Internet Intervention for Well-being in the Context of Work-family Conflict Among Dual-earner Couples: Protocol for Four-arm Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Cohabiting heterosexual couples\n* Both partners are adults aged 18 or older,\n* Both partners work at least 20 hours per week,\n* Both partners have lived together in the same household for at least 1 year,\n* Expecting to continue living together throughout the study period,\n* Experiencing conflict between work and family life,\n* Interested in learning new strategies to manage work and family demands,\n* Both partners agree to participate in the study.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Either partner lacks access to an internet-connected device,\n* Either partner has insufficient Polish language skills to complete the online program and surveys.",true,"ALL","18 Years",{"count":130,"type":131},564,"ESTIMATED","INTERVENTIONAL",[134],"NA","The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if an online program treats stress in working couples. The main questions it aims to answer are:\n\n* Does the 3-week online program lower stress for participants?\n* Does doing the program together work better than doing it alone?\n* Does the program lower conflict between work and home life?\n* Does the program improve job and family satisfaction? Researchers will compare four groups (both partners, only women, only men, and a waitlist) to see if doing the program together works best to lower stress.\n\nParticipants will:\n\n* Fill out online surveys at the start, after 3 weeks, and 6 months later.\n* Use a 3-week online program to manage time and lower stress.\n* Read short texts and track their daily habits.\n* Talk and plan with their partner if placed in the joint group.",[137,138,139],"Psychological Stress","Work-Family Conflict","Family-Work Conflict",[141,138,139,10,142,143],"Internet Intervention","Dual-Earner Couples","Dyadic Intervention","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2026-09-21",{"date":147,"type":148},"2026-09-29","ACTUAL",{"date":150,"type":131},"2026-10",{"date":152,"type":131},"2027-05",{"name":5,"class":6},1]