Cited by 56Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychological Treatments and Assessments

The effectiveness of guided internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy for social anxiety disorder in a routine care setting

Open access
Nordgreen, Tine, Gjestad, Rolf, Andersson, Gerhard, Carlbring, Per, Havik, Odd E.·2018·Internet Interventions

Abstract

Social anxiety disorder (SAD) is a common mental disorder with high persistence when untreated. As access to effective treatment is limited, guided internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (ICBT) has been proposed as an effective alternative to face-to-face treatment. In this study, we examined the effectiveness of a 14-week therapist-guided ICBT program for patients with SAD undergoing routine care. From 2014 to 2017, 169 patients were included in the study, of which 145 started the treatment. The sample was all general practitioner-referred and had a lower educational level and higher rate of work absence compared to similar effectiveness studies. Regarding social anxiety symptoms, we identified significant within-group effect sizes (post-treatment: d = 1.00–1.10; six-month follow-up: d = 1.03–1.55). We also found significant effects on secondary depression symptoms (d = 0.67). Clinically significant improvement was reported by 66.2% of the participants, and 16.6% had a significant deterioration. Clinical implications of the current study are that guided ICBT for SAD is an effective treatment for the majority of the patients undergoing routine care. Future studies should explore interventions targeting non-responders and deteriorated patients.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.invent.2018.05.003

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Within-group effect sizes for primary symptoms (Hedges g=1.38 for LSAS and 1.79 for PDSS) were as substantial as those observed in previous representative studies.

    “Notably, the within-group effect sizes for the primary symptoms in this study (Hedges g=1.38 for LSAS and 1.79 for PDSS) were as substantial as those observed in previous representative studies [49-51].”

    From Feasibility of Guided Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Panic Disorder and Social Anxiety Disorder in Japan: Pilot Single-Arm Trial (2024) · cites this paper as [51]

    The Results (Table 2; page unavailable) report a large within-group effect on the paper’s primary social-anxiety measure, SPS (ES = 1.00), so it provides a previous-study comparison for a substantial social-anxiety effect. The paper does not assess PDSS or panic symptoms, so it cannot support the comparison for both primary symptoms. The cited paper is not the source of the citing study’s stated Hedges g values. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nordgreen, T., Gjestad, R., Andersson, G., Carlbring, P., & Havik, O. E.
Affiliations
  • Haukeland University Hospital (NO)
  • Linköping University (SE)
  • Stockholm University (SE)
  • University of Bergen (NO)
Corresponding author
Nordgreen, Tine
Venue
Internet Interventions
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-09
Volume
13
Pages
24-29
ISSN
2214-7829 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2805351088
Cited by
56
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 1
FWCI
6.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Internet Interventions (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Southern Denmark Research Portal (University of Southern Denmark) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Western Norway Regional Health Authority (911826)
  • Directorate of Health (11/6252)
  • Haukeland University Hospital
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
social anxiety disorder, internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy, usual care, general practitioners, depressive symptoms, treatment effectiveness, treatment discontinuation, low educational attainment, absenteeism

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