MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399576992 · doi:10.2196/56691

Long-Term Effects of Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy on Depression Prevention Among University Students: Randomized Controlled Factorial Trial

2024· article· en· W4399576992 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yukako Nakagami, Teruhisa Uwatoko, Tomonari Shimamoto, Masatsugu Sakata, Rie Toyomoto, Kazufumi Yoshida, Yan Luo, Nao Shiraishi, Aran Tajika, Ethan Sahker, Masaru Horikoshi, Hisashi Noma, Taku Iwami, Toshi A. Furukawa

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Mental Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintThe InternetPsychologyDepression (economics)Cognitive behavioral therapyCognitionPsychotherapistClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatryComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) shows promise in the prevention of depression. However, the specific iCBT components that contribute to its effectiveness remain unclear. Objective: We aim to evaluate the effects of iCBT components in preventing depression among university students. Methods: Using a smartphone cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) app, we randomly allocated university students to the presence or absence of 5 different iCBT components: self-monitoring, behavioral activation, cognitive restructuring, assertiveness training, and problem-solving. The active intervention lasted 8 weeks but the app remained accessible through the follow-up. The primary outcome was the onset of a major depressive episode (MDE) between baseline and the follow-up after 52 weeks, as assessed with the computerized World Health Organization Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Secondary outcomes included changes in the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire, 7-item General Anxiety Disorder, and CBT Skills Scale. Results: During the 12-month follow-up, 133 of 1301 (10.22%) participants reported the onset of an MDE. There were no significant differences in the incidence of MDEs between the groups with or without each component (hazard ratios ranged from 0.85, 95% CI 0.60-1.20, for assertiveness training to 1.26, 95% CI 0.88-1.79, for self-monitoring). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in the changes on the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire, 7-item General Anxiety Disorder, or for CBT Skills Scale between component allocation groups. However, significant reductions in depression and anxiety symptoms were observed among all participants at the 52-week follow-up. Conclusions: In this study, we could not identify any specific iCBT components that were effective in preventing depression or the acquisition of CBT skills over the 12-month follow-up period, but all participants with and without intervention of each iCBT component demonstrated significant improvements in depressive and anxiety symptoms. Further research is needed to explore the potential impact of frequency of psychological assessments, nonspecific intervention effects, natural change in the mental state, and the baseline depression level.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.412 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Mental HealthSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207