Treating Depression and Anxiety with Digital Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for Insomnia: A Real World NHS Evaluation Using Standardized Outcome Measures
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that insomnia may be an important therapeutic target to improve mental health. AIMS: Evaluating changes in symptoms of depression and anxiety after supported digital cognitive behavioural therapy (dCBT) for insomnia delivered via a community-based provider (Self Help Manchester) of the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) service. METHOD: Supported dCBT for insomnia was delivered to 98 clients (mean age 44.9 years, SD 15.2, 66% female) of Self Help Manchester. All clients received six support calls from an eTherapy coordinator to support the self-help dCBT. During these calls levels of depression (Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ-9) and anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder, GAD-7) were determined. RESULTS: Depression (M difference-5.7, t(70) = 12.5, p < .001) and anxiety [Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), M difference-4.1, t(70) = 8.0, p < .001] were reduced following supported dCBT for insomnia. This translated into an IAPT recovery rate of 68% for depression and anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that dCBT for insomnia alleviates depression and anxiety in clients presenting with mental health complaints in routine healthcare.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it