Cited by 30Digital Mental Health InterventionsPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation

Added value or added burden? A qualitative investigation of blending internet self-help with face-to-face cognitive behaviour therapy for depression

Cerga-Pashoja, Arlinda, Doukani, Asmae, Gega, Lina, Walke, Jennifer, Araya, Ricardo·2020·Psychotherapy Research

Abstract

Objectives: Numerous studies and reviews have explored the value of adding therapist support to internet self-help for improving client adherence and outcomes. This study is different as it explores the value of adding internet self-help to face-to-face therapy, from the perspective of practitioners who used both. This study explores practitioners’ experiences of whether—and how—internet self-help blended with face-to-face therapy may confer an added value or become an added burden to their routine practice. Methods: Using a structured topic guide, we collected narrative data via 3 focus groups and 1 telephone interview from 11 practitioners across two sites in England. We carried out a thematic analysis within two domains, “value vs. burden”. Results: Practitioners reported that internet self-help can confer added value to face-to-face therapy by: fostering client engagement with face-to-face sessions; making therapy ubiquitous beyond sessions; and preventing therapeutic drift between sessions. Conversely, internet self-help can add burden to face-to-face therapy when it is experienced as disruptive, overwhelming and time-consuming. Conclusions: Recognizing and mitigating factors that can turn internet self-help from an added value to an added burden will help practitioners adopt and make the most out of blended therapy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10503307.2020.1720932

Cites

33 of 33 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

2 of the 35 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cerga-Pashoja, A., Doukani, A., Gega, L., Walke, J., & Araya, R.
Affiliations
  • Department of Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
  • London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
  • University of York (GB)
Corresponding author
Araya, Ricardo
Venue
Psychotherapy Research
Published
2020-02-05
Volume
30
Issue
8
Pages
998-1010
ISSN
  • 1050-3307 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-4381
OpenAlex
W3004752901
Cited by
30
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1
FWCI
3.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychotherapy Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
European Commission (603098)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Keywords
blended therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, depression, practitioner experiences, therapist workload, customer engagement, digital mental health interventions
MeSH terms
Internet-Based Intervention, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Self Care, Health Behavior, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Qualitative Research, 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