Cited by 224Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsMental Health Treatment and Access

Dissemination of cognitive-behavioral treatments for anxiety disorders: overcoming barriers and improving patient access

Gunter, Raymond W., Whittal, Maureen L.·2010·Clinical Psychology Review

Abstract

Cognitive-behavioral therapies for anxiety disorders are highly efficacious (e.g., Butler, Chapman, Forman, & Beck, 2006; Deacon & Abramowitz, 2004). These treatments nevertheless remain underutilized and difficult to access for many of the patients who suffer from these conditions (e.g., Norton & Hope, 2005). We identify various barriers to the wide-scale dissemination of these treatments, including those that are applicable to empirically supported treatments more generally (e.g., lack of training opportunities, failure to address practitioner concerns) as well as those that may be relatively specific to CBT for anxiety disorders (e.g., practitioner concerns around using exposure interventions). We offer suggestions for overcoming these barriers, including specific guidance about continued accumulation of a supportive research base, making the appeals that are necessary to obtain required funding and organizational support, and the training of practitioners to deliver these treatments. Advocates of CBT for anxiety disorders will need to demonstrate that these treatments are cost effective, if wide-scale dissemination is to occur. In the United States, advocacy with third party payers will also be necessary. Although providing such steps may prove to be a difficult endeavour, the patients who stand to benefit from this work deserve nothing less.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cpr.2009.11.001

Cites

0 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
Gunter, R. W., & Whittal, M. L.
Affiliations
  • Alberta Health Services (CA)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
Corresponding author
Gunter, Raymond W.
Venue
Clinical Psychology Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-03
Volume
30
Issue
2
Pages
194-202
ISSN
0272-7358 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2017929229
Cited by
224
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 15
FWCI
1.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
cognitive behavioral therapy, anxiety disorders, dissemination of evidence-based treatment, barriers to treatment access, empirically supported treatments, exposure therapy, practitioner training, cost-effectiveness, third-party payers, organizational support
MeSH terms
Anxiety Disorders, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Humans, Models, Psychological, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Evidence-Based Medicine

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