Telephone administered cognitive behaviour therapy for treatment of obsessive compulsive disorder: randomised controlled non-inferiority trial
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of cognitive behaviour therapy delivered by telephone with the same therapy given face to face in the treatment of obsessive compulsive disorder. DESIGN: Randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. SETTING: Two psychology outpatient departments in the United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: 72 patients with obsessive compulsive disorder. INTERVENTION: 10 weekly sessions of exposure therapy and response prevention delivered by telephone or face to face. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Yale Brown obsessive compulsive disorder scale, Beck depression inventory, and client satisfaction questionnaire. RESULTS: Difference in the Yale Brown obsessive compulsive disorder checklist score between the two treatments at six months was -0.55 (95% confidence interval -4.26 to 3.15). Patient satisfaction was high for both forms of treatment. CONCLUSION: The clinical outcome of cognitive behaviour therapy delivered by telephone was equivalent to treatment delivered face to face and similar levels of satisfaction were reported. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN500103984 [controlled-trials.com].
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Patients report equal satisfaction with telephone-delivered psychological interventions compared with the same treatment face-to-face.
“In addition, patients report high levels of acceptance of telephone delivered psychological interventions [11] and when compared with the same treatment face-to-face, report equal satisfaction [14, 15].”
From 'I didn't know what to expect': Exploring patient perspectives to identify targets for change to improve telephone-delivered psychological interventions (2020) · cites this paper as [14]
Telephone-delivered psychotherapy can reduce dropout.
“A large number of studies found that the telephone is an effective medium for delivering psychological care (8–10), and is as efficacious as face-to-face treatment, and can reduce dropout (9, 11, 83).”
From Behavioral Intervention Technologies: Evidence review and recommendations for future research in mental health (2013) · cites this paper as [11]
Telephone-delivered psychotherapy is as efficacious as face-to-face treatment.
“A large number of studies found that the telephone is an effective medium for delivering psychological care (8–10), and is as efficacious as face-to-face treatment, and can reduce dropout (9, 11, 83).”
From Behavioral Intervention Technologies: Evidence review and recommendations for future research in mental health (2013) · cites this paper as [11]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 29 · Cited by 162
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Pocock S. Clinical trials. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, 1990.
- Shrout PE. Clinical trials in psychiatry: a comment. Quality of life assessment in clinical trials: methodological issue. Neuropsychopharmacology 1992;6:49-50.
- Jones B, Jarvis P, Lewis A, Ebbutt AF. Trials to assess equivalence: the importance of rig- orous methods. BMJ 1996;313:36-9.
- Piaggio G, Elbourne DR, Altman DG, Pocock SJ, Wang SJW. Reporting of noninferior- ity and equivalence of randomized trials. JAMA 2006;295:1152-60.
- Authors
- Lovell, K., Cox, D., Haddock, G., Jones, C., Raines, D., Garvey, R., Roberts, C., & Hadley, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Manchester (GB)
- Macclesfield District General Hospital (GB)
- British Psychological Society (GB)
- Stepping Hill Hospital (GB)
- Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Lovell, Karina
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2006-08-25
- Volume
- 333
- Issue
- 7574
- Pages
- 883
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- OpenAlex
- W2138163363
- Cited by
- 162
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 10.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- BMJ (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion)
- Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
- Keywords
- obsessive-compulsive disorder, exposure and response prevention, non-inferiority, treatment satisfaction, depression, outpatient care
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Telephone, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Telemedicine
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
