MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406024293 · doi:10.2196/59489

The Impact of Parental Support on Adherence to Therapist-Assisted Internet-Delivered Acceptance and Commitment Therapy in Primary Care for Adolescents With Anxiety: Naturalistic 12-Month Follow-Up Study

2025· article· en· W4406024293 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anna Larsson, Sandra Weineland, Linnea Nissling, Josefine L. Lilja

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Pediatrics and Parenting · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersVästra Götalandsregionen
KeywordsAcceptance and commitment therapyAnxietyPsychologyClinical psychologyDistressPsychiatryIntervention (counseling)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mental health problems among adolescents are increasing, and internet-delivered acceptance and commitment therapy (iACT) constitutes a possible way to improve access to care while reducing costs. Nevertheless, few studies have investigated iACT for adolescents in regular primary care nor the role of parental support. OBJECTIVE: This is an exploratory evaluation investigating iACT, with or without parental support, for adolescents. The aims were to examine treatment adherence, symptoms of anxiety and depression, psychological flexibility, and overall functioning. METHODS: Adolescents with anxiety were recruited within the regular primary care patient flow during the implementation phase of therapist-assisted iACT for adolescents. Assessment and inclusion were executed face-to-face. Due to organizational reasons, the assignment of treatment methods could not be randomized. Adherence was investigated by measuring the number of completed modules. Outcome measures were collected by self-assessment questionnaires including the Revised Children's Anxiety and Depression Scale and Avoidance and Fusion Questionnaire for Youth, as well as interviews using the Children's Global Assessment Scale. The analysis was performed as an exploratory evaluation using descriptive data for treatment adherence and nonparametric within-group analysis with the Wilcoxon signed rank test for related samples and treatment outcomes. This evaluation is naturalistic, and the results are preliminary and of a hypothesis-generating character and should be handled with caution. RESULTS: The iACT group without parental support (n=9) exhibited a gradual dropout throughout the treatment period (n=5), whereas the iACT group with parental support (n=15) exhibited the lowest number of dropouts from treatment before completion (n=2), of which all occurred during the second half of treatment. The within-group, per-protocol analyses for the Revised Children's Anxiety and Depression Scale indicated reduced symptoms of anxiety and depression at the 12-month follow-up (z score: -2.94; P=.003; r=-0.6). The within-group, per-protocol analyses for the Avoidance and Fusion Questionnaire for Youth indicated increased psychological flexibility at the 12-month follow-up (z score: -2.54; P=.01; r=0.55). Nevertheless, no differences in overall functioning measured by the Children's Global Assessment Scale were found. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that parental support might play a role in treatment adherence in iACT for adolescents with anxiety. Moreover, the outcome measures suggest that iACT for adolescents in primary care could constitute an effective treatment for both anxiety and depression, as indicated by the symptom reduction and increased psychological flexibility, maintained at the 12-month follow-up. Nevertheless, due to a small and gender-biased sample size with a large proportion of dropouts and missing data, a nonrandomized assignment of intervention, and an analysis limited to within group, this study should be considered an explorative evaluation rather than an outcome study.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Pediatrics and ParentingSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207