Cited by 49Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchDigital Mental Health Interventions

Delivering group treatment via videoconference to individuals with traumatic brain injury: A feasibility study

Tsaousides, Theodore, D'Antonio, Emily, Varbanova, Vladimira, Spielman, Lisa·2014·Neuropsychological Rehabilitation

Abstract

The objective was to assess the feasibility of delivering a group treatment to improve emotional regulation via videoconferencing to individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI). A pre-post feasibility study was undertaken. Seven individuals with TBI were recruited at a brain injury research centre in an urban medical centre. The main measures were therapist assessment of session-by-session progress and feasibility, Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS), Brain Injury Rehabilitation Trust Regulation of Emotions Questionnaire (BREQ), Satisfaction with Therapy and Therapist Scale (STTS), and exit interview. Attendance across sessions and participants was over 90%. Adequate skill acquisition and ease of use of the technology were demonstrated. Self-reported satisfaction with treatment was high. Participants noted several benefits in terms of the treatment delivery modality. There was no change is self-reported emotional dysregulation. This is the first study to report the use of videoconferencing for the delivery of group treatment to individuals with TBI. The exceptional compliance and self-reported satisfaction suggest that this treatment delivery option could be a viable alternative for increasing access to healthcare in this population. The findings of the study supported the development of a large clinical trial to assess treatment effectiveness.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09602011.2014.907186

Cites

52 of 52 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
Tsaousides, T., D'Antonio, E., Varbanova, V., & Spielman, L.
Affiliations
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
Corresponding author
Tsaousides, Theodore
Venue
Neuropsychological Rehabilitation
Published
2014-05-09
Volume
24
Issue
5
Pages
784-803
ISSN
  • 0960-2011 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-0694
OpenAlex
W1999430284
Cited by
49
References
52
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 3 · 2014: 1
FWCI
4.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuropsychological Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
traumatic brain injury, videoconferencing, group therapy, emotion regulation, emotional dysregulation, telemedicine, treatment feasibility, treatment satisfaction, health care access, Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain Injuries, Feasibility Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychotherapy, Group, Surveys and Questionnaires, Treatment Outcome, Patient Satisfaction, Telemedicine, Videoconferencing, 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