MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171303252 · doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.2014.09.018

Therapist-assisted Internet-delivered cognitive behavior therapy for depression and anxiety: Translating evidence into clinical practice

2014· article· en· W2171303252 on OpenAlexafffund
Heather D. Hadjistavropoulos, Nicole E. Pugh, Marcie Nugent, Hugo Hesser, Gerhard Andersson, Martin Ivanov, Catherine Butz, Gregory P. Marchildon, Gordon J. G. Asmundson, Britt Klein, David Austin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Anxiety Disorders · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSaskatchewan Health Research Foundation
KeywordsAnxietyPsychologyDepression (economics)CognitionPanic disorderPanicClinical psychologyClinical PracticePsychotherapistQuality of life (healthcare)PsychiatryPhysical therapyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissemination study examined the effectiveness of therapist-assisted Internet-delivered Cognitive Behavior Therapy (ICBT) when offered in clinical practice. A centralized unit screened and coordinated ICBT delivered by newly trained therapists working in six geographically dispersed clinical settings. Using an open trial design, 221 patients were offered 12 modules of ICBT for symptoms of generalized anxiety (n=112), depression (n=83), or panic (n=26). At baseline, midpoint and post-treatment, patients completed self-report measures. On average, patients completed 8 of 12 modules. Latent growth curve modeling identified significant reductions in depression, anxiety, stress and impairment (d=.65-.78), and improvements in quality of life (d=.48-.66). Improvements in primary symptoms were large (d=.91-1.25). Overall, therapist-assisted ICBT was effective when coordinated across settings in clinical practice, but further attention should be given to strategies to improve completion of treatment modules.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.103
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.103
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.390 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations63
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Anxiety DisordersSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207