Cited by 37Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersDigital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Randomized-controlled trial on a novel (meta-)cognitive self-help approach for obsessive-compulsive disorder (“myMCT”)

Hauschildt, Marit, Schröder, Johanna, Moritz, Steffen·2016·Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jocrd.2016.04.010

Cites

75 of 75 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Hauschildt, M., Schröder, J., & Moritz, S.
Affiliations
University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (DE)
Corresponding author
Hauschildt, Marit
Venue
Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-07
Volume
10
Pages
26-34
ISSN
2211-3649 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2343708083
Cited by
37
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1
FWCI
7.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders (publishedVersion)
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, self-help, cognitive biases, obsession, depression, psychoeducation, treatment gap

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