Cited by 185Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and Access

Pragmatic evaluation of computer-aided self-help for anxiety and depression

Open access
Marks, Isaac M., Mataix-Cols, David, Kenwright, Mark, Cameron, Rachel, Hirsch, Steven, Gega, Lina·2003·British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: Most anxiety/depression is not effectively treated. Aims: Open evaluation of a free clinic giving immediate computer-aided cognitive – behavioural therapy (CBT) self-help plus brief advice from a therapist. Method: Test of outcome of self-referrals who used one of four computer-aided CBT systems for depression, phobia/panic, general anxiety or obsessive-compulsive disorder. Results: The equivalent of one full-time clinician managed 355 referrals over a year. Of the 266 who had a screening interview 79% were suitable. Completers and non-completers of computer-aided CBT had similar pre-treatment features, with very chronic, moderately severe problems. Completers of the computer-aided self-help had a mean total of an hour's live therapist support over 12 weeks. They improved significantly and clinically meaningfully with three of the four systems and felt ‘fairly satisfied’. Improvement resembled that in controlled and other trials of computer-aided CBT. Conclusions: Computer-aided self-help is a‘clinician extender’ that greatly cuts per-patient therapist time without impairing improvement. It could reduce the per-patient cost of CBT.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1192/bjp.183.1.57

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Marks, I. M., Mataix-Cols, D., Kenwright, M., Cameron, R., Hirsch, S., & Gega, L.
Affiliations
Imperial College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Marks, Isaac M.
Venue
British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2003-07
Volume
183
Issue
1
Pages
57-65
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2111906480
Cited by
185
References
20
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 13
FWCI
23.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Northumbria Research Link (Northumbria University) (submittedVersion)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
Funders
European Commission
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
self-help, anxiety disorders, depression, phobia, panic disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, therapist support, cost per patient, self-referral, free clinics, treatment outcomes
MeSH terms
Adult, Anxiety, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Outpatient Clinics, Hospital, Psychotherapy, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self-Assessment, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Treatment Refusal, Treatment Outcome

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