Cited by 67Digital Mental Health InterventionsSchizophrenia research and treatmentTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation

Internet-Based Interventions for Psychosis

Álvarez-Jiménez, Mario, Gleeson, John F., Bendall, Sarah, Lederman, R., Wadley, G., Killackey, E., McGorry, Patrick D.·2012·Psychiatric Clinics of North America

Abstract

The Internet and mobile technologies are becoming ubiquitous. However, the potential of these technologies to support people with psychosis has been unexplored and the development of innovative e-based interventions is overdue. Research suggests the acceptability and effectiveness of such interventions in psychosis. Internet-based technologies have the potential to transform psychosis treatment by enhancing the accessibility of evidence-based interventions, fostering engagement with mental health services, and maintaining treatment benefits over the long term. This article reviews the current evidence on Internet-based interventions for psychosis, including potential benefits, risks, and future challenges. Recommendations are proposed for developing future online interventions for psychosis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.psc.2012.06.011

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

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?

  • These results are in line with other acceptability studies that supported the general acceptability of web-based interventions in clinical settings.

    “Collectively, these results are in line with other acceptability studies that supported the general acceptability of web-based interventions in clinical settings [51].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 76 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Álvarez-Jiménez, M., Gleeson, J. F., Bendall, S., Lederman, R., Wadley, G., Killackey, E., & McGorry, P. D.
Affiliations
  • Australian Catholic University (AU)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
Venue
Psychiatric Clinics of North America
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-09
Volume
35
Issue
3
Pages
735-747
ISSN
0193-953X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W125637456
Cited by
67
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychiatric Clinics of North America (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Keywords
psychosis, online intervention, mobile health, online therapy, treatment accessibility, treatment engagement, intervention development
MeSH terms
Family, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Mental Health Services, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Patient Education as Topic, Peer Group, Psychotic Disorders, Self-Help Groups, Social Support, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, 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