Cited by 40Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychological Treatments and Assessments

Effect of a Cognitive Behavioral Self-Help Intervention on Depression, Anxiety, and Coping Self-Efficacy in People with Rheumatic Disease

Garnefski, N., Kraaij, V., Benoist, M., Bout, Z., Karels, E., Smit, A.·2013·Arthritis Care & Research

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether a new cognitive-behavioral self-help program with minimal coaching could improve psychological well-being (depression, anxiety, and coping self-efficacy) in people with rheumatic disease and depressive symptoms. METHODS: In total, 82 persons with a rheumatic disease enrolled in a randomized controlled trial were allocated to either a group receiving the self-help program or a waiting list control condition group. For both groups, measurements were done at baseline, posttest, and followup. The outcome measures were the depression and anxiety scales of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and an adaptation of the Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale. Repeated-measures analyses of covariance were performed to evaluate changes in outcome measures from pretest to posttest and from posttest to followup. RESULTS: The results showed that the self-help program was effective in reducing symptoms of depression and anxiety and in strengthening coping self-efficacy. The positive effects remained after a followup period of 2 months. CONCLUSION: This cost-effective program could very well be used as a first step in a stepped care approach or as one of the treatment possibilities in a matched care approach.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/acr.21936

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Garnefski, N., Kraaij, V., Benoist, M., Bout, Z., Karels, E., & Smit, A.
Affiliations
Leiden University (NL)
Venue
Arthritis Care & Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-07
Volume
65
Issue
7
Pages
1077-1084
ISSN
  • 0893-7524 (ISSN-L)
  • 2151-464X
  • 2151-4658
OpenAlex
W1502312594
Cited by
40
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1
FWCI
5.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Arthritis Care & Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
Keywords
cognitive behavioral therapy, self-help intervention, rheumatic diseases, depression, anxiety, coping self-efficacy, psychological well-being, stepped care, cost-effective treatment
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Analysis of Variance, Anxiety, Belgium, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Motivation, Netherlands, Patient Compliance, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Surveys and Questionnaires, Rheumatic Diseases, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Chi-Square Distribution, Treatment Outcome, Patient Satisfaction, Self Efficacy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review