Feasibility, Acceptability, and Preliminary Efficacy of a Smartphone App–Led Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depression Under Therapist Supervision: Open Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder affects approximately 1 in 5 adults during their lifetime and is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Yet, a minority receive adequate treatment due to person-level (eg, geographical distance to providers) and systems-level (eg, shortage of trained providers) barriers. Digital tools could improve this treatment gap by reducing the time and frequency of therapy sessions needed for effective treatment through the provision of flexible, automated support. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary clinical effect of Mindset for Depression, a deployment-ready 8-week smartphone-based cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) supported by brief teletherapy appointments with a therapist. METHODS: This 8-week, single-arm open trial tested the Mindset for Depression app when combined with 8 brief (16-25 minutes) video conferencing visits with a licensed doctoral-level CBT therapist (n=28 participants). The app offers flexible, accessible psychoeducation, CBT skills practice, and support to patients as well as clinician guidance to promote sustained engagement, monitor safety, and tailor treatment to individual patient needs. To increase accessibility and thus generalizability, all study procedures were conducted remotely. Feasibility and acceptability were assessed via attrition, patient expectations and feedback, and treatment utilization. The primary clinical outcome measure was the clinician-rated Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, administered at pretreatment, midpoint, and posttreatment. Secondary measures of functional impairment and quality of life as well as maintenance of gains (3-month follow-up) were also collected. RESULTS: Treatment credibility (week 4), expectancy (week 4), and satisfaction (week 8) were moderate to high, and attrition was low (n=2, 7%). Participants self-reported using the app or practicing (either on or off the app) the CBT skills taught in the app for a median of 50 (IQR 30-60; week 4) or 60 (IQR 30-90; week 8) minutes per week; participants accessed the app on an average 36.8 (SD 10.0) days and completed a median of 7 of 8 (IQR 6-8) steps by the week 8 assessment. The app was rated positively across domains of engagement, functionality, aesthetics, and information. Participants' depression severity scores decreased from an average Hamilton Depression Rating Scale score indicating moderate depression (mean 19.1, SD 5.0) at baseline to a week 8 mean score indicating mild depression (mean 10.8, SD 6.1; d=1.47; P<.001). Improvement was also observed for functional impairment and quality of life. Gains were maintained at 3-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The results show that Mindset for Depression is a feasible and acceptable treatment option for individuals with major depressive disorder. This smartphone-led treatment holds promise to be an efficacious, scalable, and cost-effective treatment option. The next steps include testing Mindset for Depression in a fully powered randomized controlled trial and real-world clinical settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05386329; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05386329?term=NCT05386329.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".