BackgroundInternet-based cognitive behavioural therapy (iCBT) is an effective and acceptable treatment for depression, especially when it includes guidance, but its treatment adherence has not yet been systematically studied. We conducted a meta-analysis, comparing the adherence to guided iCBT with the adherence to individual face-to-face CBT.MethodsStudies were selected from a database of trials that investigate treatment for adult depression (see www.evidencebasedpsychotherapies.org), updated to January 2013. We identified 24 studies describing 26 treatment conditions (14 face-to-face CBT, 12 guided iCBT), by means of these inclusion criteria: targeting depressed adults, no comorbid somatic disorder or substance abuse, community recruitment, published in the year 2000 or later. The main outcome measure was the percentage of completed sessions. We also coded the percentage of treatment completers (separately coding for 100% or at least 80% of treatment completed).ResultsWe did not find studies that compared guided iCBT and face-to-face CBT in a single trial that met our inclusion criteria. Face-to-face CBT treatments ranged from 12 to 28 sessions, guided iCBT interventions consisted of 5 to 9 sessions. Participants in face-to-face CBT completed on average 83.9% of their treatment, which did not differ significantly from participants in guided iCBT (80.8%, P = .59). The percentage of completers (total intervention) was significantly higher in face-to-face CBT (84.7%) than in guided iCBT (65.1%, P < .001), as was the percentage of completers of 80% or more of the intervention (face-to-face CBT: 85.2%, guided iCBT: 67.5%, P = .003). Non-completers of face-to-face CBT completed on average 24.5% of their treatment, while non-completers of guided iCBT completed on average 42.1% of their treatment.ConclusionWe did not find studies that compared guided iCBT and face-to-face CBT in a single trial. Adherence to guided iCBT appears to be adequate and could be equal to adherence to face-to-face CBT.
BackgroundTurkish migrants living in the Netherlands have a high prevalence of depressive disorders, but experience considerable obstacles to accessing professional help. Providing easily accessible Internet treatments may help to overcome these barriers.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a culturally sensitive, guided, self-help, problem-solving intervention through the Internet for reducing depressive symptoms in Turkish migrants.MethodsA two-armed randomized controlled trial was conducted. The primary outcome measure was the severity of depressive symptoms; secondary outcome measures were somatic symptoms, anxiety, quality of life, and satisfaction with the treatment. Participants were assessed online at baseline, posttest (6 weeks after baseline), and 4 months after baseline. Posttest results were analyzed on the intention-to-treat sample. Missing values were estimated by means of multiple imputation. Differences in clinical outcome between groups were analyzed with a t test. Cohen’s d was used to determine the between-groups effect size at posttreatment and follow-up.ResultsTurkish adults (N=96) with depressive symptoms were randomized to the experimental group (n=49) or to a waitlist control group (n=47). High attrition rates were found among the 96 participants of which 42% (40/96) did not complete the posttest (6 weeks) and 62% (59/96) participants did not complete the follow-up assessment at 4 months. No significant difference between the experimental group and the control group was found for depression at posttest. Recovery occurred significantly more often in the experimental group (33%, 16/49) than in the control group (9%, 4/47) at posttest (P=.02). Because of the high attrition rate, a completers-only analysis was conducted at follow-up. The experimental group showed significant improvement in depression compared to the control group both at posttest (P=.01) and follow-up (P=.01).ConclusionsThe results of this study did not show a significant effect on the reduction of depressive symptoms. However, the effect size at posttest was high, which might be an indicator of the possible effectiveness of the intervention when assessed in a larger sample and robust trial. Future research should replicate our study with adequately powered samples.Trial RegistrationDutch Trial Register: NTR2303. http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=2303 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6IOxNgoDu).
BackgroundOnline questionnaires for measuring common mental health disorders such as depression and anxiety disorders are increasingly used. The psychometrics of several pen-and-paper questionnaires have been re-examined for online use and new online instruments have been developed and tested for validity as well. This study aims to review and synthesise the literature on this subject and provide a framework for future research.MethodsWe searched Medline and PsycINFO for psychometric studies on online instruments for common mental health disorders and extracted the psychometric data. Studies were coded and assessed for quality by independent raters.ResultsWe included 56 studies on 62 online instruments. For common instruments such as the CES-D, MADRS-S and HADS there is mounting evidence for adequate psychometric properties. Further results are scattered over different instruments and different psychometric characteristics. Few studies included patient populations.ConclusionsWe found at least one online measure for each of the included mental health disorders and symptoms. A small number of online questionnaires have been studied thoroughly. This study provides an overview of online instruments to refer to when choosing an instrument for assessing common mental health disorders online, and can structure future psychometric research.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12888-016-0735-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
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.