Cited by 21Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsDigital Mental Health InterventionsTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation

Evaluating the effects of guided coaching calls on engagement and outcomes for online acceptance and commitment therapy

Levin, Michael E., Krafft, Jennifer, Davis, Carter H., Twohig, Michael P.·2021·Cognitive Behaviour Therapy

Abstract

Previous research indicates mixed results for guided support with online interventions. The current secondary analysis evaluated the effects of phone coaching from a dismantling trial of online acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) in a sample of 136 distressed college students randomized to one of three versions of an ACT website. Participants were randomized to receive email prompts alone (non-coaching condition) or email plus phone coaching (coaching condition). Results indicated no differences between the coaching and non-coaching conditions on program engagement, program satisfaction, mental health outcomes, and almost all psychological flexibility processes. However, participants in the coaching condition reported stronger pre- to posttreatment improvements in psychological inflexibility than the non-coaching condition. This effect was moderated by ACT component condition, with larger pre- to posttreatment effects from coaching on psychological inflexibility in the values/committed action condition and weaker improvements from coaching in the acceptance/defusion condition. Overall, results indicate online self-guided ACT interventions with email prompts are sufficient for addressing college student mental health and that phone coaching provided minimal additional benefit.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/16506073.2020.1846609

Cites

29 of 29 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
Levin, M. E., Krafft, J., Davis, C. H., & Twohig, M. P.
Affiliations
Utah State University (US)
Corresponding author
Levin, Michael E.
Venue
Cognitive Behaviour Therapy
Published
2021-01-12
Volume
50
Issue
5
Pages
395-408
ISSN
  • 1650-6073 (ISSN-L)
  • 1651-2316
OpenAlex
W3120719797
Cited by
21
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2
FWCI
2.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Commons - USU (Utah State University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, and European Union funds (BFU2016-77728-C3-1-P)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Keywords
acceptance and commitment therapy, online intervention, phone coaching, program engagement, psychological inflexibility, psychological flexibility, college student mental health, self-guided intervention
MeSH terms
Distance Counseling, Internet-Based Intervention, Female, Humans, Male, Mental Health, Students, Telephone, Electronic Mail, Young Adult, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy

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