The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Turn on, tune in and (don’t) drop out: engagement, adherence, attrition, and alliance with internet-based interventions
Open accessAbstract
Chapter 21 explores client engagement and the reasons why clients may or may not take up an internet intervention. Typically, engagement is affected by an interplay of factors associated with the intervention itself (such as its attractiveness and ease of navigation), as well as aspects specific to the individual client, such as his/her expectations about the benefits of the program and perceptions about the time, effort, skill level, and financial cost that will be involved in using it. This chapter recommends that, in order to facilitate engagement, LI practitioners should explore clients’ views about receiving treatment via the internet and address any concerns that they may have. Once clients are engaged, the next important step is to promote adherence to and completion of the LI internet intervention. Evidence suggests that brief weekly support increases adherence and completion of online treatments.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Adherence and dropouts are among the most discussed issues related to self-guided interventions (Cavanagh, 2010; Melville et al., 2010).”
From Internet-based self-administered intervention to reduce anxiety and depression symptomatology and improve well-being in 7 countries: protocol of a randomized control trial (2024) · cites this paper as Cavanagh, 2010
In the citing paper
“Likewise, there is available evidence that online interventions have good adherence to treatment in weekly sessions of 50 min, and with work between sessions.”
In the citing paper
“However, this structure is not recommended for groups that are not clinical, for example, for prevention and/or for people with mild problems, since the time they dedicate to the interventions is reduced, or if they do it only once, or if it is unlikely that they will return and finish (Cavanagh, 2010).”
In the citing paper
“The possession of the skills necessary to make full use of e-mental health tools affects their uptake and adherence [29].”
From Acceptability of Mental Health Apps for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians: A Qualitative Study (2016) · cites this paper as [29]
In the citing paper
“Other studies have found that introduction of e-mental health tools in a structured environment (eg, schools) or with therapist support, enhance adherence [29,31].”
From Acceptability of Mental Health Apps for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians: A Qualitative Study (2016) · cites this paper as [29]
In the citing paper
“E-mental health programs need to be attractive to the user and present themselves as a good match to the person’s needs [29].”
From Acceptability of Mental Health Apps for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians: A Qualitative Study (2016) · cites this paper as [29]
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mental Health Smartphone Apps: Review and Evidence-Based Recommendations for Future Developments
Bakker, D., Kazantzis, N., Rickwood, D., & Rickard, N. (2016) · JMIR Mental Health · doi:10.2196/mental.4984 · Cited by 886
Titov, N., Dear, B. F., Johnston, L., Lorian, C., Zou, J., Wootton, B., Spence, J., McEvoy, P. M., & Rapee, R. M. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0062873 · Cited by 364
Mobile mental health: Review of the emerging field and proof of concept study
Harrison, V., Proudfoot, J., Wee, P. P., Parker, G., Pavlovic, D. H., & Manicavasagar, V. (2011) · Journal of Mental Health · doi:10.3109/09638237.2011.608746 · Cited by 267
Pihlaja, S., Stenberg, J.-H., Joutsenniemi, K., Mehik, H., Ritola, V., & Joffe, G. (2018) · Internet Interventions · doi:10.1016/j.invent.2017.11.005 · Cited by 134
Savard, J., Ivers, H., Savard, M.-H., & Morin, C. M. (2014) · Sleep · doi:10.5665/sleep.3918 · Cited by 136
Metadata
- Authors
- Cavanagh, K.
- Affiliations
- University of Sussex (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Cavanagh, Kate
- ORCID
- Cavanagh, Kate
- Venue
- Oxford Guide to Low Intensity CBT Interventions
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press
- Published
- 2010-05
- Pages
- 227-234
- OpenAlex
- W1755671971
- Cited by
- 76
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 10.45
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- figshare.com
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- 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
- online intervention, customer engagement, medication adherence, attrition, customer expectations, perceived barriers
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
