Cited by 75Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Predicting treatment outcome in internet versus face to face treatment of panic disorder

Andersson, Gerhard, Carlbring, Per, Grimlund, Ann·2008·Computers in Human Behavior

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chb.2008.02.003

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 46 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Andersson, G., Carlbring, P., & Grimlund, A.
Affiliations
Linköping University (SE)
Corresponding author
Andersson, Gerhard
Venue
Computers in Human Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-09
Volume
24
Issue
5
Pages
1790-1801
ISSN
0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2032263828
Cited by
75
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 4
FWCI
6.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computers in Human Behavior (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 › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
panic disorder, online therapy, face-to-face treatment, predictors of treatment outcome, agoraphobic avoidance, personality disorder screening, cognitive ability, verbal fluency, treatment credibility, guided self-help

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