Cited by 159Digital Mental Health InterventionsMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 38 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Text messaging as an adjunct to CBT in low-income populations: A usability and feasibility pilot study.

Open access
Aguilera, Adrian, Muñoz, Ricardo F.·2011·Professional Psychology: Research and Practice

Abstract

This article outlines the development and usability-feasibility testing of an automated text-messaging adjunct to cognitive- behavioral therapy (CBT) for depression in a public sector clinic serving low-income patients. The text-messaging adjunct is aimed at increasing homework adherence, improving self-awareness, and helping track patient progress. Daily text messages were sent to patients, inquiring about their mood. Additional daily messages corresponded to themes of a manualized group CBT intervention. These included (1) thought tracking (both positive and negative), (2) tracking of pleasant activities, (3) tracking of positive and negative contacts, and (4) tracking of physical well-being. We tested the adjunct in 2 CBT groups (1 English & 1 Spanish) consisting of 12 patients total during and after treatment. Participants responded at a rate of 65% to text messages, and they reported overall positive experiences. We propose that text messaging has the potential to improve mental health care broadly, and among low-income populations specifically, with cost-effective means.

Overview

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/a0025499

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 39 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Aguilera, A., & Muñoz, R. F.
Affiliations
San Francisco General Hospital (US)
Venue
Professional Psychology: Research and Practice
Published
2011-12
Volume
42
Issue
6
Pages
472-478
ISSN
  • 0735-7028 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1323
OpenAlex
W2019528246
Cited by
159
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 7
FWCI
12.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Professional Psychology Research and Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (K23MH094442)
  • National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (L60 MD003465)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Keywords
text messaging, cognitive behavioral therapy, depression, low-income populations, homework adherence, self-monitoring, mood tracking, automated intervention, Spanish-language intervention

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