A Multisite Non-Inferiority Randomized Controlled Trial of the Efficacy of Cognitive-Behavior Therapy for Generalized Anxiety Disorder Delivered by Videoconference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Delivering psychotherapy by videoconference has been studied in a number of clinical trials, but no large controlled trial has involved generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). This multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiority trial was conducted to test if cognitive-behavior psychotherapy delivered by videoconference (VCP) is as effective as cognitive-behavior psychotherapy delivered face-to-face, using a strict margin of tolerance for non-inferiority. A total of 148 adults received a 15-session weekly manualized program. The treatment was based on the intolerance of uncertainty model of GAD. The impact of treatment was assessed using primary (GAD severity), secondary (worry, anxiety, and intolerance of uncertainty) and tertiary (general functioning) variables measured before and after treatment and at 6-month and 12-month follow-ups. Results showed that: (a) the treatment was effective; (b) VCP for GAD was statistically non-inferior to face-to-face psychotherapy on primary, secondary and tertiary measures at all assessment points; (c) change in intolerance of uncertainty significantly predicted change in the primary outcome measure over and above important clinical factors common to all psychotherapies (motivation, working alliance, perceived therapist competence, and client satisfaction). These findings support the use of VCP as a promising treatment option for adults with GAD. Clinical trial registry: ISRCTN#12662027.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".