Computer-aided psychotherapy: revolution or bubble?

2007 ◽  
Vol 191 (6) ◽  
pp. 471-473 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. M. Marks ◽  
K. Cavanagh ◽  
L. Gega
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural ◽  
Rapid Spread ◽  
The World ◽  
Computer Aided ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Uk

SummaryResearch into computer-aided psychotherapy is thriving around the world. Most of it concerns computer-aided cognitive–behavioural therapy (CCBT). A recent narrative review found 97 computer-aided psychotherapy systems from nine countries reported in 175 studies, of which 103 were randomised controlled trials. The rapid spread of the mass delivery of psychotherapy through CCBT, catalysed in the UK by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence's recommendation of two CCBT programmes and the Department of Health's CCBT implementation guidance, seems unprecedented. This editorial is a synopsis of the current status of CCBT and its future directions.

scholarly journals Are claims of non-inferiority of Internet and computer-based cognitive-behavioural therapy compared with in-person cognitive-behavioural therapy for adults with anxiety disorders supported by the evidence from head-to-head randomised controlled trials? A systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 53 (9) ◽  
pp. 851-865 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard O’Kearney ◽  
Sheri Kim ◽  
Rachelle L Dawson ◽  
Alison L Calear
Keyword(s):  
Panic Disorder ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Internet Cognitive Behavioural Therapy

Objective: This review examines the evidence from head-to-head randomised controlled trials addressing whether the efficacy of cognitive-behavioural therapy for anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder and post-traumatic stress disorders in adults delivered by computer or online (computer- and Internet-delivered cognitive-behavioural therapy) is not inferior to in-person cognitive-behavioural therapy for reducing levels of symptoms and producing clinically significant gains at post-treatment and at follow-up. A supplementary aim is to examine the evidence for severity as a moderator of the relative efficacy of computer- and Internet-delivered cognitive-behavioural therapy and in-person cognitive-behavioural therapy. Method: PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase and Cochrane database of randomised trials were searched for randomised controlled trials of cognitive-behavioural therapy for these disorders with at least an in-person cognitive-behavioural therapy and Internet or computer cognitive-behavioural therapy arm. Results: A total of 14 randomised controlled trials (9 Internet, 5 computer) of cognitive-behavioural therapy for social anxiety disorder, panic disorder and specific phobia and 3 reports of effect moderators were included. One study showed a low risk of bias when assessed against risk of bias criteria for non-inferiority trials. The remaining studies were assessed as high or unclear risk of bias. One study found that Internet-delivered cognitive-behavioural therapy was superior and non-inferior at post-treatment and follow-up to group in-person cognitive-behavioural therapy for social anxiety disorder. One study of Internet-delivered cognitive-behavioural therapy for panic disorder showed non-inferiority to individual in-person cognitive-behavioural therapy for responder status at post-treatment and one of Internet cognitive-behavioural therapy for panic disorder for symptom severity at follow-up. Other comparisons (22 Internet, 13 computer) and for estimates pooled for Internet cognitive-behavioural therapy for social anxiety disorder, Internet cognitive-behavioural therapy for panic disorder and computer-delivered cognitive-behavioural therapy studies did not support non-inferiority. Evidence of effect moderation by severity and co-morbidity was mixed. Conclusion: There is limited evidence from randomised controlled trials which supports claims that computer- or Internet-delivered cognitive-behavioural therapy for anxiety disorders is not inferior to in-person delivery. Randomised controlled trials properly designed to test non-inferiority are needed before conclusions about the relative benefits of in-person and Internet- and computer-delivered cognitive-behavioural therapy can be made. Prospero: CRD420180961655-6

Strategies to prevent death by suicide: Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2017 ◽  
Vol 210 (6) ◽  
pp. 396-402 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalie B. V. Riblet ◽  
Brian Shiner ◽  
Yinong Young-Xu ◽  
Bradley V. Watts
Keyword(s):  
Suicide Prevention ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
World Health ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Randomised Controlled

BackgroundFew randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have shown decreases in suicide.AimsTo identify interventions for preventing suicide.MethodWe searched EMBASE and Medline from inception until 31 December 2015. We included RCTs comparing prevention strategies with control. We pooled odds ratios (ORs) for suicide using the Peto method.ResultsAmong 8647 citations, 72 RCTs and 6 pooled analyses met inclusion criteria. Three RCTs (n= 2028) found that the World Health Organization (WHO) brief intervention and contact (BIC) was associated with significantly lower odds of suicide (OR = 0.20, 95% CI 0.09–0.42). Six RCTs (n= 1040) of cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) for suicide prevention and six RCTs of lithium (n = 619) yielded non-significant findings (OR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.12–1.03 and OR = 0.23, 95% CI 0.05–1.02, respectively).ConclusionsThe WHO BIC is a promising suicide prevention strategy. No other intervention showed a statistically significant effect in reducing suicide.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document