Cited by 75Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and Access

Transdiagnostic versus disorder-specific internet-delivered cognitive behaviour therapy for anxiety and depression in primary care

Newby, Jill M., Mewton, Louise, Andrews, Gavin·2017·Journal of Anxiety Disorders

Abstract

Background Disorder-specific and transdiagnostic internet cognitive behaviour therapy (iCBT) programs are effective for anxiety and depression, but no studies have compared their effectiveness in primary care. Methods Patient characteristics, adherence and effectiveness of Transdiagnostic iCBT (n=1005) were compared to disorder-specific programs for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) (n=738) and depression (n=366) in a naturalistic non-randomised comparison study. Patients completed their iCBT program in primary care. The PHQ-9 (depression), GAD-7 (generalized anxiety), K-10 (distress), and the WHODAS-II (disability) were measured at pre- and post-treatment. Results Patients in the Transdiagnostic program had higher comorbidity rates and baseline distress. All programs were associated with medium to large within-group effect sizes for improving anxiety, depression and distress between pre- and post-treatment (d's=0.64-1.39). Controlling for baseline group differences in severity, we found small effect sizes favoring the Transdiagnostic program over the GAD program in reducing PHQ-9 (d=0.44, 95%CI: 0.34-0.53), K-10 (d=0.21, 95%CI: 0.16-0.35) and WHODAS scores (d=0.20, 95%CI: 0.10-0.29), and small effect sizes favoring the Transdiagnostic program over the Depression program in reducing GAD-7 scores (d=0.48, 95%CI: 0.36-0.60). A smaller proportion of patients completed the Transdiagnostic program (44.9%) compared to the depression (51.6%) and GAD (49.2%) programs, which was attr…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.janxdis.2016.06.002

Cites

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.

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 39 · Cited by 75

Authors
Newby, J. M., Mewton, L., & Andrews, G.
Affiliations
UNSW Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Newby, Jill M.
Venue
Journal of Anxiety Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-03
Volume
46
Pages
25-34
ISSN
0887-6185 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2473942552
Cited by
75
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 12
FWCI
12.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Anxiety Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (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 › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy, transdiagnostic treatment, generalized anxiety disorder, depression, primary care, medication adherence, comorbidities, distress, disability, PHQ-9, GAD-7, WHODAS II
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Anxiety, Anxiety Disorders, Depression, Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Primary Health Care, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Remote Consultation, Internet, Young Adult

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