Cited by 59Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and Access

Treating Youth Depression and Anxiety: A Randomised Controlled Trial Examining the Efficacy of Computerised versus Face‐to‐face Cognitive Behaviour Therapy

Sethi, Suvena·2013·Australian Psychologist

Abstract

Barriers to accessing psychologists for the treatment of depression and anxiety include a shortage of specialised therapists, long waiting lists, and the affordability of therapy. This study examined the efficacy of a computerised‐based self‐help program (MoodGYM) delivered in‐conjunction with face‐to‐face cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) to expand the delivery avenues of psychological treatment for young adults (aged 18–25 years). Eighty‐nine participants suffering from depression and/or generalised anxiety were randomly allocated to a control intervention or to one of three experimental groups: receiving face‐to‐face CBT, receiving computerised CBT (cCBT), or receiving treatment in‐conjunction (face‐to‐face CBT and cCBT). While MoodGYM did not significantly decrease depression in comparison to the control group, significant decreases were found for anxiety. MoodGYM delivered in‐conjunction with face‐to‐face CBT is more effective in treating symptoms of depression and anxiety compared with standalone face‐to‐face or cCBT. This study suggests that for youth who are unable to access face‐to‐face therapy—such as those in rural or remote regions, or for communities in which there is stigma attached to seeking help—computerised therapy may be a viable option. This is an important finding, especially in light of the current capacity‐to‐treat and accessibility problems faced by youth when seeking treatment for depression and/or anxiety.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ap.12006

Cites

47 of 47 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?

  • Across the RCTs included in this review, the risk of bias was rated as low for two studies, and moderate for two studies.

    “Across the RCTs included in this review, the risk of bias was rated as low for two studies [38,40], and moderate for two studies [41,47].”
  • Combining therapist and computer-delivered CBT has also been shown to be a particularly effective method for treating anxiety and depression among adolescents and similarly reduces the therapist time required to treat each patient.

    “Combining therapist and computer-delivered CBT has also been shown to be a particularly effective method for treating anxiety and depression among adolescents and similarly reduces the therapist time required to treat each patient [47,58].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sethi, S.
Affiliations
The University of Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
Sethi, Suvena
Venue
Australian Psychologist
Published
2013-08-01
Volume
48
Issue
4
Pages
249-257
ISSN
  • 0005-0067 (ISSN-L)
  • 1742-9544
OpenAlex
W1807608602
Cited by
59
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 3
FWCI
6.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Australian Psychologist (publishedVersion)
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 › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
adolescent depression, generalized anxiety disorder, computerized cognitive behavioral therapy, MoodGYM, self-help intervention, treatment accessibility, young adults, help-seeking stigma

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