The Efficacy of PowerPoint-based CBT Delivered Through Email: Breaking the Barriers to Treatment for Generalized Anxiety Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A lack of resources and cultural stigma associated with mental health treatment necessitate the development of innovative and economical individualized treatments. This study evaluated the efficacy of delivering computer-based cognitive behavioral therapy (e-CBT) presented through Microsoft PowerPoint and delivered via email in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) to Iranian patients, as a means of overcoming treatment barriers. METHODS: Participants (N=80) of Iranian descent were recruited through announcements on psychology websites, Iranian organization websites, weblogs, and in flyers. Participants were randomly assigned to either an e-CBT or a control group. The e-CBT group received 12 weekly modules and homework assignments through email, presented using PowerPoint. The control group received no treatment (individuals in the control group were able to pursue another treatment, but would then be excluded from the study although they could continue with the program). All emails were sent by an attending or resident psychiatrist, who also provided feedback on weekly homework via email. The Beck Anxiety Inventory was used to measure levels of anxiety before study onset and changes in levels of anxiety upon completion of the program at 12 weeks, and at 6-month and 1-year follow-up in both groups. RESULTS: Beck Anxiety Inventory scores were significantly reduced in the group who received PowerPoint e-CBT modules delivered via email, compared with the control group, following 12 weeks of treatment, and the reductions were maintained at both follow-up points. CONCLUSIONS: Delivery of PowerPoint e-CBT modules via email was found to be a viable method for delivering CBT to individuals with GAD and a simple method for overcoming language, cultural, and travel barriers to accessing mental health resources. This simplified approach to the individualization and delivery of treatment modules has the potential to improve access to CBT as a treatment option throughout the world.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".