Cited by 71Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychological Treatments and AssessmentsDigital Mental Health Interventions

Comparison of relaxation training with a cognitive-behavioural intervention for indicated prevention of depression in university students: a randomized controlled trial

Vázquez, Fernando L., Torres, Angela, Blanco, Vanessa, Díaz, Olga, Otero, Patricia, Hermida, Elisabet·2012·Journal of Psychiatric Research

Abstract

Although cognitive-behavioural programmes for preventing depression have produced promising findings, their administration requires extensive training. Relaxation techniques are more straightforward psychological strategies, but they have not been investigated in the prevention of depression. This trial aimed to compare the results of relaxation training (RT) with that of a cognitive-behavioural programme (CBT) for prevention of depression in university students with elevated depressive symptoms. The 133 participants (mean age 23.3 years, 82% women) were randomly assigned to CBT or RT. Both programmes were administered to groups of 5 or 6 participants in eight weekly 90-min sessions. Participants were evaluated by independent raters before, immediately after, and 3 and 6 months after taking part in the programmes. By itself, intervention type had no significant effect on either depression or anxiety scores. The scores were lower at the follow-up time points with respect to pre-intervention scores. Effect size was greatest between pre- and immediately post-intervention scores for CBT, d = 1.32, 95% CI [1.00, 1.64], and between pre- and 6-month post-intervention scores for RT, d = 0.75, 95% CI [0.47, 1.03]. Anxiety symptoms were significantly improved by both interventions at 3-month follow-up, and by CBT at 6-month follow-up also. In the medium term (3-6 months), relaxation training produced similar reductions in depressive and anxiety symptoms as a more complex cognitive-behavioural programme.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2012.08.007

Cites

57 of 57 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
Vázquez, F. L., Torres, A., Blanco, V., Díaz, O., Otero, P., & Hermida, E.
Affiliations
Universidade de Santiago de Compostela (ES)
Corresponding author
Vázquez, Fernando L.
Venue
Journal of Psychiatric Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-11
Volume
46
Issue
11
Pages
1456-1463
ISSN
0022-3956 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2039338546
Cited by
71
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 8
FWCI
9.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Psychiatric Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
depression prevention, relaxation training, cognitive behavioral therapy, university students, anxiety symptoms, group therapy
MeSH terms
Adult, Anxiety, Depression, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Relaxation Therapy, Spain, Students, Time Factors, Universities, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, 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