Cited by 69Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsDigital Mental Health InterventionsTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation

Therapeutic alliance in face-to-face and telephone-administered cognitive behavioral therapy.

Open access
Stiles-Shields, Colleen, Kwasny, Mary J., Cai, Xuan, Mohr, David C.·2014·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Telephone-administered therapies have emerged as an alternative method of delivery for the treatment of depression, yet concerns persist that the use of the telephone may have a deleterious effect on therapeutic alliance. The purpose of this study was to compare therapeutic alliance in clients receiving cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for depression by telephone (T-CBT) or face-to-face (FtF-CBT). METHOD: We randomized 325 participants to receive 18 sessions of T-CBT or FtF-CBT. The Working Alliance Inventory (WAI) was administered at Weeks 4 and 14. Depression was measured during treatment and over 1 year posttreatment follow-up using the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression and Patient Health Questionnaire-9. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in client or therapist WAI between T-CBT or FtF-CBT (Cohen's f² ranged from 0 to .013, all ps > .05). All WAI scores predicted depression end of treatment outcomes (Cohen's f² ranged from .009 to .06, all ps < .02). The relationship between the WAI and depression outcomes did not vary by treatment group (Cohen's f² ranged from 0 to .004, ps > .07). The WAI did not significantly predict depression during posttreatment follow-up (all ps > .12). CONCLUSIONS: Results from this analysis do not support the hypothesis that the use of the telephone to provide CBT reduces therapeutic alliance relative to FtF-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/a0035554

Cites

29 of 29 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?

  • Current evidence supports the feasible and efficacious delivery of web-based CBT using nontraditional health professionals such as PTs and OTs, with reduced time commitment and treatment costs, and positive self-reported changes in PTs' attitudes, confidence, and practice.

    “Current evidence supports the feasible and efficacious delivery of web-based CBT using nontraditional health professionals such as physiotherapists (PTs) and occupational therapists (OTs) [45], with reduced time commitment and treatment costs, and positive self-reported changes in the PTs’ attitudes, confidence, and practice [46-48].”

    From Development and usability testing of a web-based and therapist-assisted coping skills program for managing psychosocial problems in individuals with hand and upper limb injuries: Mixed methods study (2020) · cites this paper as [47]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 1 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stiles-Shields, C., Kwasny, M. J., Cai, X., & Mohr, D. C.
Affiliations
Northwestern University (US)
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Published
2014
Volume
82
Issue
2
Pages
349-354
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
OpenAlex
W2116886816
Cited by
69
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4
FWCI
5.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01 MH059708)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Keywords
therapeutic relationship, depression treatment, Working Alliance Inventory, treatment outcome prediction, telehealth delivery
MeSH terms
Adult, Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Professional-Patient Relations, Surveys and Questionnaires, Telephone, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Remote Consultation

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