MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413742001 · doi:10.2196/65396

Internet-Delivered Psychological Treatment for Parents With Health Anxiety by Proxy: Replicated Randomized Single-Case Experimental Design

2025· article· en· W4413742001 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Katrine Ingeman, Ditte Hoffmann Frydendal, Lisbeth Frostholm, Ellen Bjerre-Nielsen, Kaare Bro Wellnitz, Patrick Onghena, Kristi D. Wright, Charlotte Ulrikka Rask

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersRegion MidtjyllandAase og Ejnar Danielsens FondAarhus Universitet
KeywordsPreprintAnxietyProxy (statistics)The InternetPsychologyRandomized controlled trialClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatryComputer scienceWorld Wide WebInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Health anxiety by proxy is characterized by ruminations about severe illness in one's child that can cause severe distress in affected parents. Health anxiety by proxy may lead to repeated unnecessary medical consultations and checking the child's body for symptoms, as well as heightened attention to their child's behavior, sign of illness, and bodily symptoms. It has been hypothesized that health anxiety by proxy may pose a risk for transmission of maladaptive symptom coping and health anxiety from the parent to their child. In spite of this, no targeted treatment has previously been evaluated. Therefore, we developed an internet-delivered psychological treatment containing 8 modules based on cognitive behavioral therapy and acceptance and commitment therapy. Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate the feasibility and effect of the internet-delivered treatment PROXY for parents with health anxiety by proxy. Methods: A total of 4 participants with health anxiety by proxy entered a replicated randomized single-case experimental design. They were randomly allocated to a baseline period of 7-26 days before entering the 8-week treatment and 14-33 days follow-up phase. The primary outcomes were daily measures of anxiety, impact of anxiety, and value-based actions measured using 5 questions answered on a scale of 1-10 through a text-message link. The primary outcomes were analyzed using visual analysis and supplemented with statistical randomization tests. Secondary outcomes were standardized questionnaire measures of anxiety-related symptoms, experience of the treatment, and negative effects of the treatment reported using descriptive statistics for each participant individually. Results: Visual and statistical analyses indicated that PROXY was an effective treatment for 2 participants as the primary outcomes changed in the preferable direction for both of them. The effect of PROXY was questionable for the remaining 2 participants, although visual analysis showed that the impact of anxiety decreased for one of them. The 2 participants with questionable effect also thought that the treatment was too short. All 4 participants were happy with the treatment, but 2 participants experienced that health anxiety for their own health deteriorated during treatment. Conclusions: PROXY holds potential as a treatment for HA by proxy. However, more work is required to determine when and how PROXY should be introduced to parents with HA by proxy, particularly in relation to duration of treatment, possible comorbidities, and the need for findings to be replicated in larger groups.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
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 head0.165
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments→French-language works237,207→