MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394989096 · doi:10.1186/s13722-024-00456-8

Internet-delivered therapy for alcohol misuse: engagement, satisfaction, and outcomes when patients select their preference for therapist- or self-guided treatment

2024· article· en· W4394989096 on OpenAlex
Ram P. Sapkota, Tristen Lozinski, Andrew Wilhems, Marcie Nugent, Michael P Schaub, Matthew T. Keough, Christopher Sundström, Heather D. Hadjistavropoulos

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction Science & Clinical Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of Regina
FundersSaskatchewan Health Research FoundationMinistry of Health, SaskatchewanUniversity of Regina
KeywordsPreferenceAnxietyClinical psychologyHarmPsychiatryPsychologyMedicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Alcohol misuse is common and causes substantial harm. Internet-delivered cognitive behaviour therapy (ICBT) is effective in reducing alcohol misuse; however, the literature investigating how treatment outcomes are impacted by patients' preferences for therapist- versus self-guided ICBT for alcohol misuse is sparse. METHODS: In this preference trial, 74 eligible patients (who reported ≥ 14 drinks in the previous week and obtained scores suggesting hazardous or harmful drinking) chose between enrolling in either therapist- or self-guided ICBT for alcohol misuse. We investigated whether those who chose therapist- versus self-guided ICBT differed in their (a) drinking outcomes-as measured by Timeline Follow-Back (TLFB) and heavy drinking days (HDD) at post-treatment and 3-month follow-up-and (b) post-treatment ICBT engagement and satisfaction. RESULTS: The majority (81.1%) of eligible patients chose therapist-guided ICBT. These patients reported higher psychotropic medication use, drinking difficulties, and anxiety symptoms. For both the therapist- and self-guided patients, a modified intention-to-treat analysis revealed large within-group treatment effects for TLFB (β = - 2.64, SE 0.66; p < 0.001) and HDD (β = - 0.34, SE 0.07; p < 0.001), with large pre-to-post-treatment Cohen's effect sizes of d = 0.97 (95% CI [0.49, 1.45]) for TLFB and d = 1.19 (95% CI [0.69, 1.68]) for HDD. The interaction comparing the effects of therapist- to self-guided ICBT over time was not significant for TLFB (p = 0.34) or HDD (p = 0.06). With treatment, for both therapist- and self-guided patients, there was a significant improvement in drinking difficulties, cravings, and confidence with controlling cravings, as well as in anxiety, depression, and functional impairment. Further, the majority (75.7%) of patients completed five or more lessons, as well as reported overall satisfaction with the treatment (88.9%) and increased confidence in managing their symptoms (86.7%); these outcomes also did not differ between therapist- and self-guided patients. CONCLUSIONS: The current study shows that ICBT for alcohol misuse is associated with reduced drinking and comorbid mental health difficulties over time, irrespective of whether patients chose to complete the course on their own or with therapist guidance. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04611854 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04611854 ).

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score0.752

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.334
GPT teacher head0.536
Teacher spread0.201 · 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