Utilization, Patient Characteristics, and Longitudinal Improvements among Patients from a Provincially Funded Transdiagnostic Internet-delivered Cognitive Behavioural Therapy Program: Observational Study of Trends over 6 Years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: There is strong evidence supporting internet-delivered cognitive behaviour therapy (iCBT) and consequently growing demand for iCBT in Canada. Transdiagnostic iCBT that addresses both depression and anxiety is particularly promising as it represents an efficient method of delivering iCBT in routine care. The Online Therapy Unit, funded by the Saskatchewan government, has been offering transdiagnostic iCBT for depression and anxiety since 2013. In this article, to broadly inform implementation efforts, we examined trends in utilization, patient characteristics, and longitudinal improvements for patients receiving transdiagnostic iCBT over 6 years. METHODS: Patients who completed telephone screening between November 2013 and December 2019 were included in this observational study. Patients provided demographics and mental health history at screening and completed measures at pre-treatment, post-treatment and at 3- to 4-month follow-up. Treatment engagement and satisfaction were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 5,321 telephone screenings were completed and 4,283 of patients were accepted for treatment over the 6-year period (80.5% acceptance). The most common reason for referral to another service was high suicide risk/severe symptoms (47.1%). Examination of trends showed growing use of transdiagnostic iCBT over time (37% increase per year). There was remarkable stability in patient characteristics across years. Most patients were concurrently using medication (57.3%) with 11.9% reporting using iCBT while on a waiting list for face-to-face treatment highlighting the importance of integrating iCBT with other services. Consistent across years, large improvements in depression and anxiety symptoms were found and maintained at 3- to 4-month follow-up. There was strong patient engagement with iCBT and positive ratings of treatment experiences. CONCLUSIONS: As there is growing interest in iCBT in Canada, this large observational study provides valuable information for those implementing iCBT in terms of likely user characteristics, patterns of use, and improvements. This information has potential to assist with resource allocation and planning in Canada and elsewhere.
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 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".