Cited by 312Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsDigital Mental Health InterventionsHearing Loss and Rehabilitation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Internet-Based Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Distress Associated With Tinnitus

Andersson, G.·2002·Psychosomatic Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate if cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) provided via the Internet results in significant decreases of distress in individuals with tinnitus. METHODS: Participants were recruited through Web pages and newspaper articles and thereafter randomly allocated to a CBT self-help manual in six modules or to a waiting-list control group (WLC). All treatment and contact with participants were conducted via the Internet with Web pages and E-mail correspondence. Participants were 117 individuals with tinnitus of duration of more than 6 months. In the first randomized controlled phase of the study, 26 completed all stages of treatment (51% dropout), and 64 of the WLC group completed measures. At 1-year follow-up, all participants had been offered the program and 96 provided outcome measures (18% dropout rate from baseline). Tinnitus-related problems were assessed before and after treatment and at the 1-year follow-up. Daily diary ratings were included for 1 week before and 1 week following the treatment period. RESULTS: Tinnitus-related distress, depression, and diary ratings of annoyance decreased significantly. Immediately following the randomized controlled phase (with a WLC), significantly more participants in the treatment group showed an improvement of at least 50% on the Tinnitus Reaction Questionnaire. At the uncontrolled follow-up, 27 (31%) of all participants had achieved a clinically significant improvement. CONCLUSIONS: CBT via the Internet can help individuals decrease annoyance associated with tinnitus. High dropout rates or delay in completing treatment can be a characteristic of treatment studies using the Internet but should be contrasted with the cost effectiveness and accessibility of the Internet.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/01.psy.0000031577.42041.f8

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 30 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Andersson, G.
Affiliations
Uppsala University (SE)
Corresponding author
Andersson, G.
Venue
Psychosomatic Medicine
Published
2002-09-01
Volume
64
Issue
5
Pages
810-816
ISSN
  • 0033-3174 (ISSN-L)
  • 1534-7796
OpenAlex
W2058574286
Cited by
312
References
30
Citations by year
2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 13
FWCI
6.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychosomatic Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Keywords
tinnitus, cognitive behavioral therapy, online therapy, tinnitus distress, tinnitus annoyance, depression, self-help books, treatment discontinuation, long-term follow-up
MeSH terms
Anxiety, Major Depressive Disorder, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Tinnitus, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Prevalence, 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