Cited by 381Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychological Treatments and Assessments

A randomized controlled trial of online versus clinic-based CBT for adolescent anxiety.

Open access
Spence, Susan H., Donovan, Caroline L., March, Sonja, Gamble, Amanda, Anderson, Renee E., Prosser, Samantha, Kenardy, Justin·2011·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The study examined the relative efficacy of online (NET) versus clinic (CLIN) delivery of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) in the treatment of anxiety disorders in adolescents. METHOD: Participants included 115 clinically anxious adolescents aged 12 to 18 years and their parent(s). Adolescents were randomly assigned to NET, CLIN, or wait list control (WLC) conditions. The treatment groups received equivalent CBT content. Clinical diagnostic interviews and questionnaire assessments were completed 12 weeks after baseline and at 6- and 12-month follow-ups. RESULTS: Assessment at 12 weeks post-baseline showed significantly greater reductions in anxiety diagnoses and anxiety symptoms for both NET and CLIN conditions compared with the WLC. These improvements were maintained or further enhanced for both conditions, with minimal differences between them, at 6- and 12-month follow-ups. Seventy-eight percent of adolescents in the NET group (completer sample) no longer met criteria for the principal anxiety diagnosis at 12-month follow-up compared with 80.6% in the CLIN group. Ratings of treatment credibility from both parents and adolescents were high for NET and equivalent to CLIN. Satisfaction ratings by adolescents were equivalent for NET and CLIN conditions, whereas parents indicated slightly higher satisfaction ratings for the CLIN format. CONCLUSIONS: Online delivery of CBT, with minimal therapist support, is equally efficacious as clinic-based, face-to-face therapy in the treatment of anxiety disorders among adolescents. This approach offers a credible alternative to clinic-based therapy, with benefits of reduced therapist time and greater accessibility for families who have difficulty accessing clinic-based CBT.

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 · 10.1037/a0024512

Cites

37 of 37 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?

  • In an Australian randomized controlled trial, at the 12-month follow-up, there were no significant differences regarding treatment outcomes between iCBT, face-to-face CBT, and waitlist conditions.

    “At the 12-month follow-up, the authors found no significant differences regarding treatment outcomes between the groups”

    From The Impact of Parental Support on Adherence to Therapist-Assisted Internet-Delivered Acceptance and Commitment Therapy in Primary Care for Adolescents With Anxiety: Naturalistic 12-Month Follow-Up Study (2025) · cites this paper as [11]

    The Discussion reports no significant difference in 12-month outcomes between internet-based and clinic-based CBT. But it also states that the waitlist condition was absent at follow-up; participants were offered internet treatment after the 12-week assessment. The paper therefore does not support a 12-month comparison among all three groups. (LLM, conf=0.92)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Multiple previous studies have indicated positive treatment outcomes for iACT for adolescents with anxiety.

    “Multiple previous studies have indicated positive treatment outcomes for iACT for adolescents with anxiety [9-12], but few have performed follow-ups at 12 months after treatment or longer.”

    From The Impact of Parental Support on Adherence to Therapist-Assisted Internet-Delivered Acceptance and Commitment Therapy in Primary Care for Adolescents With Anxiety: Naturalistic 12-Month Follow-Up Study (2025) · cites this paper as [11]

    The Discussion reports positive treatment outcomes for adolescents with anxiety who received online CBT, including improvements maintained through 12 months. It does not report outcomes for iACT, so the claim’s specific treatment attribution is unsupported by this source. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The adherence rate to f-CBT is 77.5%.

    “The adherence rate of 77.5% to f-CBT was estimated from the results reported in two randomized controlled trials on (total 242) participants with symptoms of anxiety [16, 17].”

    From Cost-effectiveness of internet-supported cognitive behavioral therapy for university students with anxiety symptoms: A Markov-model analysis (2022) · cites this paper as [17]

    The Completion of Therapy Sessions section reports that 79% of clinic-based CBT adolescents completed all sessions by 12-month follow-up, a result that could contribute to the citing authors’ estimate. It does not report a 77.5% adherence rate or the combined estimate from two trials; at the 12-week assessment, the corresponding completion figure was 57%. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The relative difference in adherence to CBT delivered via internet versus in-person is 0.99.

    “The relative difference in adherence to CBT delivered via internet versus in-person (76.9% versus 77.5%) were estimated to be 0.99 [16–18].”

    From Cost-effectiveness of internet-supported cognitive behavioral therapy for university students with anxiety symptoms: A Markov-model analysis (2022) · cites this paper as [17]

    The Completion of Therapy Sessions section (page unavailable) compares session completion for online and clinic-based CBT, so the paper supports an adherence comparison. It reports 7.5 versus 8.25 adolescent sessions completed on average at 12 weeks and 8.20 versus 8.70 at 12 months, but does not report the claimed 76.9% versus 77.5% or a relative value of 0.99. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The demonstrated effect sizes for reductions in anxiety from baseline to Session 9 in this study (Cohen d=0.83-1.01) are similar to the effect sizes observed in previous RCTs (Cohen d=0.91-1.23 for the full Spence Children's Anxiety Scale).

    “The demonstrated effect sizes for reductions in anxiety from the baseline to Session 9 in this study (Cohen d=0.83-1.01) are similar to the effect sizes observed in previous RCTs (Cohen d=0.91-1.23 for the full Spence Children’s Anxiety Scale) [10,11].”

    From Large-scale dissemination of internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy for youth anxiety: Feasibility and acceptability study (2018) · cites this paper as [11]

    The Secondary outcome measures results report reduced SCAS-C anxiety symptoms in this RCT, so the cited paper supports the comparison’s general premise. But the Discussion tables report outcomes at 12 weeks, not Session 9, and do not substantiate the attributed Cohen’s d range of 0.91–1.23 for the full scale. The baseline-to-Session-9 figures describe the citing study, not this source. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

1 of the 38 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [9]9. Guy, W., & Bonato, R. R. (Eds.). (1970). CGI: Clinical Global Impressions. Chevy Chase (Maryland): National Institute of Mental Health.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Spence, S. H., Donovan, C. L., March, S., Gamble, A., Anderson, R. E., Prosser, S., & Kenardy, J.
Affiliations
  • Griffith University (AU)
  • Macquarie University (AU)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Published
2011-10
Volume
79
Issue
5
Pages
629-642
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
OpenAlex
W1982417363
Cited by
381
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 32 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 11
FWCI
26.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Health and Medical Research Council
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 › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
Keywords
cognitive behavioral therapy, adolescent anxiety, online therapy, internet-delivered treatment, treatment efficacy, treatment credibility, treatment satisfaction, access to mental health care, anxiety disorders
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Anxiety Disorders, Child, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Interview, Psychological, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, 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