Usage and Longitudinal Effectiveness of a Web-Based Self-Help Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Program for Panic Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Anxiety disorders are common problems that result in enormous suffering and economic costs. The efficacy of Web-based self-help approaches for anxiety disorders has been demonstrated in a number of controlled trials. However, there is little data regarding the patterns of use and effectiveness of freely available Web-based interventions outside the context of controlled trials. OBJECTIVE: To examine the use and longitudinal effectiveness of a freely available, 12-session, Web-based, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) program for panic disorder and agoraphobia. METHODS: Cumulative anonymous data were analyzed from 99695 users of the Panic Center. Usage statistics for the website were examined and a longitudinal survey of self-reported symptoms for people who registered for the CBT program was conducted. The primary outcome measures were self-reported panic-attack frequency and severity at the beginning of each session (sessions 2-12). RESULTS: Between September 1, 2002 and February 1, 2004, there were 484695 visits and 1148097 page views from 99695 users to the Panic Center. In that same time period, 1161 users registered for the CBT program. There was an extremely high attrition rate with only 12 (1.03%) out of 1161 of registered users completing the 12-week program. However, even for those who remained in the program less than 12 weeks we found statistically significant reductions (P<.002) in self-reported panic attack frequency and severity, comparing 2 weeks of data against data after 3, 6, or 8 weeks. For example, the 152 users completing only 3 sessions of the program reduced their average number of attacks per day from 1.03 (week 2) to 0.63 (week 3) (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Freely available Web-based self-help will likely be associated with high attrition. However, for the highly self-selected group who stayed in the program, significant improvements were observed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".