Web-Based Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for Adults With a History of Depression: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Depression poses a major threat to public health with an increasing prevalence in the United States. Mindfulness-based interventions, such as mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT), are effective methods for managing depression symptoms and may help fortify existing efforts to address the current disease burden. The in-person group format of MBCT, however, incurs barriers to care such as expenses, childcare needs, and transportation issues. Alternate delivery modalities such as MBCT delivered via the web can be investigated for their capacity to overcome these barriers and still reduce symptoms of depression with adequate feasibility and efficacy. OBJECTIVE: This study protocol aims to examine the feasibility and efficacy of MBCT delivered via the web for the treatment of depression. METHODS: To attain study aims, 2 phases will be implemented using a waitlist control design. A total of 128 eligible participants will be randomized into either an 8-week MBCT intervention group plus treatment as usual (MBCT + TAU; group 1) or an 8-week waitlist control group (group 2). In phase I (8 weeks), group 1 will complete the intervention and group 2 will proceed with TAU. In phase II (8 weeks), group 2 will complete the intervention and group 1 will continue with TAU until reaching an 8-week follow-up. TAU may consist of receiving psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, or combined treatment. Data collection will be completed at baseline, 8 weeks (postintervention for group 1 and preintervention for group 2), and 16 weeks (follow-up for group 1, postintervention for group 2). The primary outcomes will include (1) current, residual, or chronic depression symptoms and (2) psychiatric distress. Secondary outcomes will include perceived stress and facets of mindfulness. The feasibility will be measured by assessing protocol adherence, retention, attendance, and engagement. Finally, the extent of mindfulness self-practice and executive functioning skills will be assessed as mediators of intervention outcomes. RESULTS: This study began screening and recruitment in December 2022. Data collection from the first cohort occurred in January 2023. By November 2023, a total of 30 participants were enrolled out of 224 who received screening. Data analysis began in February 2024, with an approximate publication of results by August 2024. Institutional review board approval took place on September 11, 2019. CONCLUSIONS: This trial will contribute to examining mindfulness-based interventions, delivered via the web, for improving current, residual, or chronic depression symptoms. It will (1) address the feasibility of MBCT delivered via the web; (2) contribute evidence regarding MBCT's efficacy in reducing depression symptoms and psychiatric distress; and (3) assess the impact of MBCT on several important secondary outcomes. Findings from this study will develop the understanding of the causal pathways between MBCT delivered via the web and depression symptoms further, elucidating the potential for future larger-scale designs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05347719; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05347719. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/53966.
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 | 0.032 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.094 | 0.014 |
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".