Background Computer-assisted treatment may reduce therapist contact and costs and promote client participation. This meta-analysis examined the efficacy and acceptability of an unguided computer-assisted therapy in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) compared with a waiting list or attention placebo. Objective This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and adherence of computer-assisted self-help treatment without human contact in patients with OCD using a systematic review and meta-analysis approach. Methods Randomized controlled trials with participants primarily diagnosed with OCD by health professionals with clinically significant OCD symptoms as measured with validated scales were included. The interventions included self-help treatment through the internet, computers, and smartphones. We excluded interventions that used human contact. We conducted a search on PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov, as well as the reference lists of the included studies. The risk of bias was evaluated using version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. We calculated the standardized mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes. The primary outcomes were short-term improvement of OCD symptoms measured by validated scales and dropout for any reason. Results We included 11 randomized controlled trials with a total of 983 participants. The results indicated that unguided computer-assisted self-help therapy was significantly more effective than a waiting list or psychological placebo (standard mean difference −0.47, 95% CI −0.73 to −0.22). Unguided computer-assisted self-help therapy had more dropouts for any reason than waiting list or psychological placebo (risk ratio 1.98, 95% CI 1.21 to 3.23). However, the quality of evidence was very low because of the risk of bias and inconsistent results among the included studies. The subgroup analysis showed that exposure response and prevention and an intervention duration of more than 4 weeks strengthen the efficacy without worsening acceptability. Only a few studies have examined the interaction between participants and systems, and no study has used gamification. Most researchers only used text-based interventions, and no study has used a mobile device. The overall risk of bias of the included studies was high and the heterogeneity of results was moderate to considerable. Conclusions Unguided computer-assisted self-help therapy for OCD is effective compared with waiting lists or psychological placebo. An exposure response and prevention component and intervention duration of more than 4 weeks may strengthen the efficacy without worsening the acceptability of the therapy. Trial Registration PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) CRD42021264644; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=264644
IntroductionDespite the recent global mental health movement of the transition from hospital-centred to integrated community-based services, comprehensive evidence of psychosocial interventions focusing on community-dwelling individuals with schizophrenia is still lacking. To overcome this gap in the current knowledge, we will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of all types of psychosocial interventions for community-dwelling (non-hospitalised) individuals with schizophrenia when compared with non-active control conditions (eg, treatment as usual).Methods and analysisThis study protocol has been developed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines. By March 2022, the following sources will have been searched, without restrictions for language or publication period: Embase, PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We will also try to identify other potentially eligible studies by searching the reference lists of included studies, other relevant systematic reviews and grey literature. All relevant randomised controlled trials from both high-income and low-income to middle-income countries will be allowed. Two independent reviewers will conduct the selection/screening of studies, data extraction and methodological quality assessment of included studies. The primary outcomes are quality of life and psychiatric hospital admission. Standard pairwise meta-analyses with a random-effects model will be conducted. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be performed to assess the robustness of the findings. Risk of bias will be assessed with the Revised Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool for Randomised Trials. The Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach will be used to assess the quality of evidence.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this study. The study findings will be disseminated through conference presentations as well as peer-reviewed publications.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021266187.
The child anxiety impact scale-parent version (CAIS-P) is a useful measure to assess the impact of anxiety on a child’s daily life; however, a Japanese version of the CAIS-P has not been developed, and whether the CAIS-P can be utilized in Eastern countries remains unascertained. The purpose of this study was to develop a Japanese version of the CAIS-P and examine its reliability and validity. Parents of 400 children (aged 7 to 15 years) from the Japanese community completed the CAIS-P. A confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the factor structure of the original CAIS-P, consisting of school activity, social activity, and home/family activity factors, provided a good fit for the Japanese version of the CAIS-P. Estimated Spearman’s correlation coefficients showed moderate correlations between the total and factor scores of the CAIS-P, anxiety symptoms (Spence Child Anxiety Scale-parent version), and depressive symptoms (Child Depression Inventory). Furthermore, the item response theory model revealed that each factor of the CAIS-P is a high information reliable measure for children with high trait anxiety. These results provide support for the Japanese version of the CAIS-P’s factorial validity, convergent validity, and reliability and its potential for application in child anxiety research in Japan.
Background: Guided parent-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy (GPD-CBT) is an effective low-intensity treatment for childhood anxiety disorder in Western countries and can increase access to evidence-based psychological therapies. Aim: This study aimed to examine its feasibility in a Japanese sample. Method: Twelve children with anxiety disorders and their parents participated in the study, and ten children and parents completed the program. Participants were assessed at pre-, post- and one-month follow-up using a diagnostic interview for anxiety disorders, self- and parent-report measures for anxiety, depression, parental behaviour, and parental anxiety. Results: Four children (40% of completers) were free from their primary diagnoses immediately following the brief treatment, and seven children (70%) at the one-month follow-up. Changes in disorder severity, child and parent reported anxiety symptoms, and child reported depression symptoms were consistent with those found in Western trials of GPD-CBT and of Japanese trials of more intensive CBT for child anxiety disorders that involves both the child and the parent. Moderate increases were also found in child reported parental autonomy behaviours; however, there were only small changes in parent self-reported anxiety. Conclusion: These results support the potential of GPD-CBT to increase access to evidence-based treatments for anxiety disorders in Japanese children.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.