Cited by 33Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersDigital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Technological advances in psychotherapy: Implications for the assessment and treatment of obsessive compulsive disorder

Open access
Lind, Christian, Boschen, Mark J., Morrissey, Shirley·2013·Journal of Anxiety Disorders

Abstract

Obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) is a prevalent and costly condition that causes significant functional impairment and reduced quality of life. Although treatments with demonstrated efficacy for OCD, such as cognitive behavior therapy and antidepressants, have existed for over three decades, many patients remain inadequately treated or untreated. Challenges encountered in the treatment of OCD include problems with homework compliance, frequent relapse, difficulties in simulating the spontaneous nature of intrusive thoughts, and infrequent treatment sessions. Accumulated research now indicates that computerized assessment and therapy tools can significantly improve the cost/time-effectiveness of conventional psychotherapeutic interventions for anxiety disorders such as OCD without impairing therapeutic progress and outcome. In this paper we examine the potential of such technology, address current challenges in the assessment and treatment of OCD, and provide a rationale for future research in the field. We outline the general utility of computer technology in psychotherapeutic interventions, critically evaluate the existing literature on computer-assisted assessment and treatment specific to OCD, as well as discuss potential implications of portable technology for OCD treatment delivery and outcomes.

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.janxdis.2012.09.004

Cites

99 of 99 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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lind, C., Boschen, M. J., & Morrissey, S.
Affiliations
Griffith University (AU)
Corresponding author
Boschen, Mark J.
Venue
Journal of Anxiety Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-01
Volume
27
Issue
1
Pages
47-55
ISSN
0887-6185 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1989316189
Cited by
33
References
99
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 1
FWCI
0.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Anxiety Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
obsessive-compulsive disorder, computer-assisted psychotherapy, computer-based testing, cognitive behavioral therapy, homework compliance, relapse, intrusive thoughts, mobile technology, treatment delivery, cost-effectiveness, anxiety disorders
MeSH terms
Humans, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Computers, Handheld

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