Cited by 43Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychological Treatments and Assessments

Internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Stech, Eileen P., Lim, Jaclyn, Upton, Emily L., Newby, Jill M.·2020·Cognitive Behaviour Therapy

Abstract

The current systematic review and meta-analysis examined the efficacy and effectiveness of internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) on panic disorder and agoraphobia symptom severity. Twenty-seven studies were identified. Results from nine randomised controlled trials (RCTs) showed that iCBT outperformed waiting list and information controls for panic ( g = 1.22) and agoraphobia ( g = .91) symptoms, but the quality of RCTs varied and heterogeneity was high. Results from three RCTs suggested iCBT may have similar outcomes to face-to-face CBT in reducing panic and agoraphobia symptoms. Within-group effect sizes between baseline and post-treatment were large for panic ( n = 29, g = 1.16) and medium for agoraphobia symptom severity ( n = 18, g = .73). Subgroup analyses of within-group pre/post treatment effect sizes showed larger within-group effect sizes for efficacy studies ( n = 15) compared to effectiveness studies ( n = 14) for panic severity ( g = 1.38 vs. g = .98) but not agoraphobia severity. There was no impact of program length, inclusion or arousal reduction techniques, or degree of clinician support. Within-group effects of iCBT suggest the reduction in panic and agoraphobia symptom severity is maintained at 3-6 month follow-up ( n = 12).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/16506073.2019.1628808

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 39 · Cited by 43

Authors
Stech, E. P., Lim, J., Upton, E. L., & Newby, J. M.
Affiliations
UNSW Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Stech, Eileen P.
Venue
Cognitive Behaviour Therapy
Published
2019-07-15
Volume
49
Issue
4
Pages
270-293
ISSN
  • 1650-6073 (ISSN-L)
  • 1651-2316
OpenAlex
W2962037468
Cited by
43
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 1
FWCI
0.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UNSWorks (University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Australian National Medical Research Council and Medical Research Future Fund Career Development Fellowship (MRFF1145382)
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
internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy, panic disorder, agoraphobia, symptom severity, treatment efficacy, treatment effectiveness, maintenance of treatment effects, clinician support, program duration
MeSH terms
Agoraphobia, Humans, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Panic Disorder, 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