Technology and psychotherapeutic interventions: Bibliometric analysis of the past four decades

Abstract

Background Rapid growth of the integration of technology and psychotherapeutic interventions has been noted, but no clear quantification of this growth has been done. Aims This bibliometric analysis seeks to quantify the growth, trends, and applications of technology in psychotherapeutic interventions over the last 40 years. Methods Searches were conducted in the Web of Science (WOS) database for all existing technology-psychotherapy-related publications from 1981 to October 2020. Search terms were refined using a systematic screening strategy, based upon Cochrane protocol, generating 52 technology terms. Analyses across 40 years and by decade from 1981 to 2020 were conducted. Results A total of 13,934 peer-reviewed articles were identified. Yearly publication rate has increased from one in 1981 to 1902 by October 2020. The growth rate of publications across decades consistently tripled in size (762.50% from the 1980s to 1990s, 539.71% from the 1990s to 2000s, and 337.24% from the 2000s to 2010s). The author, country, journal, and institution with the most publications were Andersson, G., USA, Journal of Medical Internet Research, and Karolinska Institute, respectively. The most frequent technology search term across all four decades was “internet*.” The trends in percentages of peer-reviewed publications within each decade showed: 1) a declining trend for the term “computer,” 2) an upward trend for the combined terms, “internet,” “online,” and “web,” 3) and a steady but smaller proportion of publications for other terms (“cell phone,” “phone/telephone,” “technology,” “video,” “virtual reality or VR,” “apps,” “digital,” “machine learning,” “electronic,” “robo,” and “telehealth”). Discussion The rapid growth and trends identified in technology and psychotherapy publications can inform related policies addressing the role of technology in mental health. Moreover, pattern analyses may provide direction for a standard nomenclature to address terminology usage inconsistencies across the field.

Systematic review of machine learning utilization within outpatient psychodynamic psychotherapy research

“…Ten of the 27 excluded studies either tried to predict the outcome of cognitive behavior therapy by using natural language processing, or tried to predict optimal therapeutic interventions with sociodemographic data ( 30 – 40 ). Another 16 studies excluded were reviews about machine learning and its utilization within psychotherapy, psychopharmacotherapy, and diagnostics ( 19 , 27 , 38 , 41 – 51 ). Another 8 Studies were excluded because they treated patients with psychotherapy, yet did not specify which kind of treatment approach they used ( 22 , 29 , 52 – 57 ).…”

Evolution of Primary Research Studies in Digital Interventions for Mental Well-Being Promotion from 2004 to 2023: A Bibliometric Analysis of Studies on the Web of Science

“…A distinctive increase in research productivity, though, was observed early on in 2020 with the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, which was followed by a surge in publications reporting on preventive digital mental health interventions, reflecting the fast-track submission processes that were adopted by academic journals to speed up knowledge dissemination. The Journal of Medical Internet Research was the leading and most influential source of publications, which also ranked first in a previous bibliometric analysis of research production in technology and psychotherapeutic interventions [ 50 ]. JMIR Formative Research ranked second, further highlighting the surge in interest in developing and, thus, piloting and evaluating novel interventions during the last three years.…”

Prognostic Risk Factors in Randomized Clinical Trials of Face-to-Face and Internet-Based Psychotherapy for Depression

“…Psychotherapy for depression can be offered in different settings and treatment modalities. Traditionally, treatment is delivered face to face, but internet-based therapy (IBT) has gained popularity and the number of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of IBT has grown during the past 2 decades . Recent direct and indirect comparisons suggest that therapist-guided IBT can be as beneficial as face-to-face therapy (FTF).…”