MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177064870 · doi:10.1177/07067437211027319

Face-to-face versus Video Teleconference Group Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for Anxiety and Related Disorders: A Preliminary Comparison

2021· article· en· W3177064870 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Irena Milosevic, Duncan H. Cameron, Melissa Milanovic, Randi E. McCabe, Karen Rowa

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelehealthPanic disorderAnxietyPsychologyCognitive behavioral therapyTelemedicineClinical psychologyAttendanceTelepsychiatryFace-to-faceVideoconferencingRandomized controlled trialAgoraphobiaPsychiatryMedicineHealth careMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Telehealth is being increasingly incorporated into the delivery of mental health care and has received widespread attention during the COVID-19 pandemic for its ability to facilitate care during physical distancing restrictions. Videoconferencing is a common telehealth modality for delivering psychotherapy and has demonstrated similar outcomes to those of face-to-face therapy. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is the most common psychotherapy evaluated across various telehealth modalities; however, studies on CBT delivered via videoconference, particularly in a group therapy format, are lacking. Further, little research exists on videoconference group CBT for anxiety disorders. Accordingly, the present study compared the outcomes of group CBT for anxiety and related disorders delivered via videoconference versus face-to-face. METHOD: Using a non-randomized design, data on attendance, dropout, clinical outcomes, and functional impairment were collected from 413 adult outpatients of a tertiary care anxiety disorders clinic who attended a CBT group for panic disorder/agoraphobia, social anxiety disorder, generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), or obsessive-compulsive disorder delivered either face-to-face (pre-COVID-19 pandemic) or via videoconference (since the onset of COVID-19 pandemic). Outcomes were assessed using well-validated self-report measures. Data were collected pre-treatment, across 12 weekly sessions, and post-treatment. Intent-to-treat analyses were applied to symptom outcome measures. RESULTS: Face-to-face CBT conferred only a slight benefit over videoconference CBT for symptom outcomes across all groups, but when assessed individually, only the GAD group showed greater symptom improvement in the face-to-face format. Effect sizes for significant differences between the delivery formats were small. Participants in videoconference groups tended to have slightly higher attendance rates in some instances, whereas functional improvement and treatment dropout were comparable across the delivery formats. CONCLUSIONS: Results provide preliminary evidence that videoconference group CBT for anxiety and related disorders may be a promising and effective alternative to face-to-face CBT. Additional research is needed to establish equivalence between these delivery formats.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.880

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations43
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207