Cited by 154Digital Mental Health InterventionsTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationMental Health Treatment and Access

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 8 of the 11 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Interest in Behavioral and Psychological Treatments Delivered Face-to-Face, by Telephone, and by Internet

Open access
Mohr, David C., Siddique, Juned, Ho, Joyce, Duffecy, Jenna, Jin, Ling, Fokuo, J. Konadu·2010·Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Little is known about the acceptability of internet and telephone treatments, or what factors might influence patient interest in receiving treatments via these media. This study examined the level of interest in face-to-face, telephone, and internet treatment and factors that might influence that interest. Six hundred fifty-eight primary care patients were surveyed. Among patients interested in some form of behavioral treatment, 91.9% were interested or would consider face-to-face care compared to 62.4% for telephone and 48.0% for internet care. Symptom severity was unrelated to interest in treatment delivery medium. Interest in specific treatment targeting mental health, lifestyle, or pain was more strongly predictive of interest in face-to-face treatment than telephone or internet treatments. Only interest in lifestyle intervention was predictive of interest in internet-delivered treatment. Time constraints as a barrier were more predictive of interest in telephone and internet treatments compared to face-to-face. These findings provide some support for the notion that telephone and internet treatments may overcome barriers. People who seek help with lifestyle change may be more open to internet-delivered treatments, while interest in internet intervention does not appear to be associated with the desire for help in mental health, pain, or tobacco use. © 2010 The Society of Behavioral Medicine.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12160-010-9203-7

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

42 Own result · 15 Own interpretation · 7 Own method · 3 Partly supported · 3 No basis given · 1 Supported · 1 Not checked yet · accuracy not yet measured

Show all 50 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 17
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 5
22 of 22
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Little is known about the acceptability of internet and telephone treatments, or what factors might influence patient interest in receiving treatments via these media.

    “Little is known about the acceptability of internet and telephone treatments, or what factors might influence patient interest in receiving treatments via these media.”
    “Little is known about the relative acceptability or level of interest in telephone- or internet-administered treatments, compared to traditional face-to-face delivered care.”
    “There is also virtually no information on what creates, supports or diminishes interest in receiving treatments via these different delivery media.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The notion that telephone and internet treatments will overcome barriers is largely untested.

    “This is potentially an important finding, in so far as the notion that the use of telephone and internet will overcome barriers is an assumption that remains largely untested (22).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The three treatment delivery media examined in this study are not mutually exclusive.

    “The three treatment delivery media examined in this study are not mutually exclusive.”
3 of 3

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

2 of 2

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 154

Metadata

Authors
Mohr, D. C., Siddique, J., Ho, J., Duffecy, J., Jin, L., & Fokuo, J. K.
Affiliations
Northwestern University (US)
Corresponding author
Mohr, David C.
Venue
Annals of Behavioral Medicine
Published
2010-07-21
Volume
40
Issue
1
Pages
89-98
ISSN
  • 0742-5554 (ISSN-L)
  • 0883-6612
  • 1532-4796
OpenAlex
W1973720661
Cited by
154
References
26
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 8
FWCI
13.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annals of Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R34MH078922, R01MH059708)
  • National Center for Research Resources (UL1RR025741)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
internet-delivered treatment, face-to-face treatment, treatment acceptability, primary care patients, lifestyle intervention, psychotherapy, pain management, tobacco use, time constraints, barriers to treatment access
MeSH terms
Anxiety, Behavior Therapy, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Motivation, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Psychotherapy, Severity of Illness Index, Telephone, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Internet

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 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

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