Cited by 290Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychological Treatments and Assessments

Is internet-based CBT for panic disorder and agoraphobia as effective as face-to-face CBT?

Kiropoulos, Litza A., Klein, Britt, Austin, David W., Gilson, Kathryn, Pier, Ciaran, Mitchell, Joanna, Ciechomski, Lisa·2008·Journal of Anxiety Disorders

Abstract

This study compared Panic Online (PO), an internet-based CBT intervention, to best-practice face-to-face CBT for people with panic disorder with or without agoraphobia. Eighty-six people with a primary diagnosis of panic disorder were recruited from Victoria, Australia. Participants were randomly assigned to either PO (n=46) or best practice face-to-face CBT (n=40). Effects of the internet-based CBT program were found to be comparable to those of face-to-face CBT. Both interventions produced significant reductions in panic disorder and agoraphobia clinician severity ratings, self reported panic disorder severity and panic attack frequency, measures of depression, anxiety, stress and panic related cognitions, and displayed improvements in quality of life. Participants rated both treatment conditions as equally credible and satisfying. Participants in the face-to-face CBT treatment group cited higher enjoyment with communicating with their therapist. Consistent with this, therapists' ratings for compliance to treatment and understanding of the CBT material was higher in the face-to-face CBT treatment group. PO required significantly less therapist time than the face-to-face CBT condition.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.janxdis.2008.01.008

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 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
Kiropoulos, L. A., Klein, B., Austin, D. W., Gilson, K., Pier, C., Mitchell, J., & Ciechomski, L.
Affiliations
Monash University (AU)
Corresponding author
Kiropoulos, Litza A.
Venue
Journal of Anxiety Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-12
Volume
22
Issue
8
Pages
1273-1284
ISSN
0887-6185 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2013146721
Cited by
290
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 24
FWCI
32.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Anxiety Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • FedUni ResearchOnline (Federation University Australia) (submittedVersion)
  • Swinburne figshare (Swinburne University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
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
internet-based CBT, panic disorder, agoraphobia, treatment effectiveness, treatment credibility, treatment satisfaction, quality of life, depression, anxiety, stress, medication adherence
MeSH terms
Adult, Agoraphobia, Australia, Female, Humans, Male, Manuals as Topic, Middle Aged, Patient Compliance, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self-Help Groups, Severity of Illness Index, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Comorbidity, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Panic Disorder, Treatment Outcome, Patient Satisfaction, Remote Consultation, 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.

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