Cited by 112Digital Mental Health InterventionsHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityMobile Health and mHealth Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 8 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

The Science of Internet Interventions

Ritterband, Lee M., Tate, Deborah F.·2009·Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Over the past decade, there has been an explosion in research focused on the development and evaluation of health-based treatment and prevention programs delivered via the Internet. A plethora of terms have been used to both categorize the related field (e.g., e-therapy, online treatment, Internet therapy, and interactive health communication), as well as the specific applications (e.g., web-based programs, Internet applications, and web systems). The programs or “Internet interventions,” as they are more apt to be called, typically target behavioral or mental health problems. Prior to these Internet-based programs, computer-based applications to change behavior or treat mental disorders had been created and tested intermittently during the previous two decades as computers were popularized. The breadth of literature on these systems, particularly those that utilize the Internet, has become quite substantive [1]. Outcome trials of Internet interventions have consistently demonstrated greater symptom improvements or changes in behavior compared with controls, and for some problems, outcomes from Internet interventions rival those seen in face-to-face interventions. Hundreds of peer-reviewed papers have now been published in this area, most since the year 2000. There is already quite a number of review articles focused specifically on Internet intervention research. Some of these reviews are now older, highlighting early, but important findings in the field [2]; some are systematic and fairly detailed [3]; and some are large scale, comprehensive reviews [1, 4]. There are many reviews focused on specific areas, such as pediatrics [5]; physical activity [6]; obesity [7]; alcohol and tobacco use [8, 9]; cardiac disease [10]; depression and anxiety [11]; and traumatic stress [12]. There are also a surprising number of published meta-analyses for such a young field [13–15]. The conclusion drawn from most reviews and meta-analyses is that Internet interventions yield positive treatment outcomes, symptom reduction, and improved quality of life.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This editorial introduces a special series arguing that Internet interventions have established efficacy but lack a sufficient scientific foundation. It summarizes five contributions on definitions, a behavior-change model, methodology, cost-effectiveness, and commentary.

Key findings

  • Outcome trials of Internet interventions have consistently demonstrated greater symptom improvements or behavior changes compared with controls, and for some problems outcomes rival face-to-face interventions; hundreds of peer-reviewed papers have been published, most since 2000.
  • Despite many reviews and meta-analyses concluding positive treatment outcomes, symptom reduction, and improved quality of life, there is “remarkably little literature on the underlying science of the field.”
  • Barak et al. organize programs into four primary categories: web-based interventions, online counseling and therapy, Internet-operated therapeutic software, and other online activities; Ritterband et al. propose a nine-step behavior-change model.
  • Danaher and Seeley review methodological approaches and call for more innovative designs; Tate et al. review cost and cost-effectiveness analyses and note that few studies provide cost data; Glasgow’s commentary highlights scalability, reach, and health disparity.

Methods

  • Design: editorial/introduction to a special series in *Annals of Behavioral Medicine*; not an empirical study.
  • Data or sample: narrative overview of five special-series articles—Barak et al., Ritterband et al., Danaher and Seeley, Tate et al., and a commentary by Glasgow.
  • Main analysis: descriptive synthesis of each article’s focus and implications; no primary data collection or statistical analysis is reported.

Limitations

  • Stated: the Ritterband model is a simplification that will evolve, with components possibly added or removed and further elements requiring testing; cost savings are often assumed based on fully automated systems, while few studies provide cost data; requiring outcomes similar to face-to-face care may be unnecessarily stringent.
  • Evident: as an editorial, it presents no original empirical data, systematic review methods, or quantitative synthesis, so its conclusions rely on cited literature and the special-series papers.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12160-009-9132-5

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

15 Own interpretation · 4 Not checked yet · 3 No basis given

Verify all 8 references — free account

Show all 4 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 3
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 16
18 of 18
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There is remarkably little literature on the underlying science of Internet interventions.

    “However, despite considerable attention devoted to Internet intervention research, there is remarkably little literature on the underlying science of the field.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Little attention has been paid in the literature to the theoretical underpinnings of Internet interventions.

    “In addition to definitions, little attention has been paid in the literature to the theoretical underpinnings of Internet interventions.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Behavior change and symptom improvement are typically assumed to be achieved through the same means as more traditional intervention approaches such as face-to-face treatment.

    “Behavior change and symptom improvement are typically assumed to be achieved through the same means as more traditional intervention approaches such as face-to-face treatment.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The feasibility of Internet interventions is now well-established.

    “The feasibility of Internet interventions is now wellestablished.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Internet interventions have the potential to reach large numbers of people all over the world with enormous cost savings.

    “Internet interventions have the potential to reach large numbers of people all over the world with enormous cost savings.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Internet interventions cost less than traditional services.

    “While it may seem obvious that Internet interventions cost less than traditional services, this assumption is typically based on comparisons to fully automated systems, where ongoing maintenance costs are considered to be minimal per user.”
6 of 6

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 23 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Ritterband, L. M., & Tate, D. F.
Affiliations
  • University of Virginia Health System (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Corresponding author
Ritterband, Lee M.
Venue
Annals of Behavioral Medicine
Published
2009-08
Volume
38
Issue
1
Pages
1-3
ISSN
  • 0742-5554 (ISSN-L)
  • 0883-6612
  • 1532-4796
OpenAlex
W1991503422
Cited by
111
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 7
FWCI
9.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annals of Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
online intervention, e-therapy, online therapy, behavioral health, psychotherapy, prevention programs, treatment outcomes, meta-analysis
MeSH terms
Humans, Psychotherapy, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Internet, Evidence-Based Practice

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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