CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 118Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychological Treatments and Assessments

Internet-Guided Self-Help with or without Exposure Therapy for Phobic and Panic Disorders

Schneider, Andreas J., Mataix-Cols, David, Marks, Isaac M., Bachofen, Martin·2005·Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics
DOI 10.1159/000084000
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: As many sufferers from phobic and panic (phobia/panic) disorders cannot get to suitable therapists, routine aspects of therapy were delegated to internet-accessed computer-aided self-help with or without exposure instructions. METHODS: Phobia/panic referrals were randomised to computer-aided self-help via the internet at home in a 2:1 ratio either by self-exposure cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) [FearFighter (FF), n = 45] or by minimal CBT without exposure [Managing Anxiety (MA), n = 23]. All had brief backup phone advice from a clinician concerning their computer guidance. RESULTS: On self-ratings and blinded assessor ratings, patients improved equally with each form of self-help over 10 treatment weeks but significantly more on 5 out of 10 measures by week 14 (1-month follow-up) when the self-help included self-exposure instructions than when it did not. In accord with this, standardised effect sizes (Cohen's d) indicated superiority of FF over MA on 5 measures by week 14. Satisfaction with treatment in all patients pooled correlated positively with improvement after treatment and at 1-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: At the end of treatment, computer-aided CBT self-help at home via the internet plus brief live helpline support was effective with or without exposure instructions, and at 1-month follow-up it was more effective on some measures if exposure instructions had been included. Analysis is needed of how non-exposure CBT produced its shorter-term effect.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000084000

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?

  • Other controlled studies have included specific phobias along with other disorders in their ICBTs.

    “Other controlled studies have included specific phobias along with other disorders in their ICBTs.”

    From An Internet-based treatment for Flying Phobia using 360° images: Study protocol for a feasibility pilot study (2021) · cites this paper as Schneider et al., 2005

  • Delegating the routine, basic elements of exposure treatment to a guided Internet-based situation could shorten face-to-face therapy and limit therapist involvement, making the treatment more cost-effective.

    “Delegating the routine, basic elements of exposure treatment to a guided Internet-based situation could shorten face-to-face therapy and limit therapist involvement, making the treatment more cost-effective [19,34].”

    From Short-term effectiveness of web-based guided self-help for phobic outpatients: randomized controlled trial. (2014) · cites this paper as [19]

  • When comparing effect sizes of the current trial with earlier trials of Internet-based anxiety and phobia interventions, the effect sizes of the current trial are low overall.

    “When comparing effect sizes of the current trial with earlier trials of Internet-based anxiety and phobia interventions, we found that the effect sizes of the current trial are low overall [19,58].”

    From Short-term effectiveness of web-based guided self-help for phobic outpatients: randomized controlled trial. (2014) · cites this paper as [19]

  • There is no unambiguous evidence that CBT should outperform exposure therapy for phobias per se, with studies finding either no difference or a negligible advantage for either CBT or exposure therapy in phobias.

    “it should be noted that the intervention of the current trial included a number of CBT components and that there is no unambiguous evidence that CBT should outperform exposure therapy for phobias per se, with studies finding either no difference or a negligible advantage for either CBT of exposure therapy in phobias (eg, [14,19,59,60]).”

    From Short-term effectiveness of web-based guided self-help for phobic outpatients: randomized controlled trial. (2014) · cites this paper as [19]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Schneider, A. J., Mataix-Cols, D., Marks, I. M., & Bachofen, M.
Affiliations
King's College London (GB)
Venue
Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2005
Volume
74
Issue
3
Pages
154-164
ISSN
  • 0033-3190 (ISSN-L)
  • 1423-0348
DOI
10.1159/000084000
OpenAlex
W2082884226
Cited by
118
References
29
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 7
FWCI
15.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
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 › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
Keywords
phobia, panic disorder, exposure therapy, treatment satisfaction, access to mental health care
MeSH terms
Humans, Phobic Disorders, Self-Help Groups, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Panic Disorder, 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