Does concurrent medication usage affect patient response to internet-delivered cognitive behaviour therapy for depression and anxiety?
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: There is growing interest in Internet-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy (ICBT) as an alternative to face-to-face therapy for anxiety and depression because it reduces barriers to accessing traditional treatment (e.g., travel distance, cost, stigma). Extensive research has demonstrated that ICBT is an effective treatment for anxiety and depression and that it produces effect sizes comparable to medication and face-to-face therapy. In routine practice, however, ICBT patients commonly receive simultaneous pharmacological treatment, and few studies have examined how medication affects patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to explore whether use of psychotropic medications predicts outcomes or adherence among patients receiving ICBT for depression and anxiety in a large community sample. METHODS: This study used data from 1201 patients who received an 8-week course of ICBT for anxiety and depression that included weekly therapist support as part of routine care. Patients reported medication usage and completed measures of depression and anxiety before treatment, after treatment, and at three-month follow-up. RESULTS: 60% of patients at pre-treatment reported regularly taking psychotropic medication. Common classes of medication reported included: (i) selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (34%); (ii) anxiolytics (15%); (iii) serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (14%); (iv) antipsychotics (8%); and (v) norepinephrine-dopamine reuptake inhibitors (7%). At post-treatment and three-month follow-up, overall medication usage reduced slightly to 55%, with the greatest reduction seen in anxiolytics. Logistic regression revealed that none of the classes of medication commonly reported at pre-treatment were associated with study completion rates. A recursive partitioning algorithm found that usage of tetracyclic medication was related to smaller pre-to-post reductions in anxiety symptoms and did not identify any medication types that were related to differences in depressive symptom change. Patients on medication tended to report higher levels of anxiety symptoms at intake and experienced somewhat more modest symptom reductions than patients not taking medications; nevertheless, they still experienced large reductions in depression and anxiety over the course of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that medication usage is very common in a diverse community sample of patients seeking ICBT for anxiety and depression. Patients reporting medication usage at intake are likely to benefit from treatment approximately as much as patients not taking medication. These results support the continued referral of patients receiving psychotropic medication to ICBT programs for anxiety and depression. Program designers might also consider providing information about the common medications (SSRIs, SNRIs, anxiolytics) used by this population alongside CBT materials.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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