Cited by 207Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychological Treatments and Assessments

Computerised cognitive-behavioural therapy for depression: systematic review

Open access
Kaltenthaler, Eva, Parry, Glenys, Beverley, Catherine, Ferriter, Michael·2008·British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: Computerised cognitive–behavioural therapy (CCBT) is used for treating depression and provides a potentially useful alternative to therapist cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT). Aims: To systematically review the evidence for the effectiveness of CCBT for the treatment of mild to moderate depression. Method: Electronic databases were searched to identify randomised controlled trials. Selected studies were quality assessed and data extracted by two reviewers. Results: Four studies of three computer software packages met the inclusion criteria. Comparators were treatment as usual, using a depression education website and an attention placebo. Conclusions: There is some evidence to support the effectiveness of CCBT for the treatment of depression. However, all studies were associated with considerable drop-out rates and little evidence was presented regarding participants' preferences and the acceptability of the therapy. More research is needed to determine the place of CCBT in the potential range of treatment options offered to individuals with depression.

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.bp.106.025981

Cites

17 of 17 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?

  • The use of the Internet is a feasible solution for the accessibility problem in psychotherapy.

    “The use of the Internet has been shown to be a feasible solution for the accessibility problem (18, 19).”

    From Exploring the relationship between the acceptability of an internet-based intervention for depression in primary care and clinical outcomes: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial (2019) · cites this paper as [19]

    The introduction identifies limited access to CBT, and ‘Areas for further research’ says computerised CBT could potentially reach far more people where access is limited. The review includes an Internet-delivered programme (‘Overcoming Depression on the Internet’), but it does not establish that Internet delivery has solved the accessibility problem; its conclusion remains qualified and concerns computerised CBT more broadly. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Treatments' completion and effectiveness will improve with the acceptability of the intervention.

    “Based on these results, it is important to take into account the benefit of developing interventions not only with effective treatment components but also with aspects that improve patients’ expectations and satisfaction with the intervention, because the treatments’ completion and effectiveness will improve with the acceptability of the intervention (19, 69, 83).”

    From Exploring the relationship between the acceptability of an internet-based intervention for depression in primary care and clinical outcomes: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial (2019) · cites this paper as [19]

    The Participant satisfaction section reports that one study inferred MoodGYM’s acceptability from low drop-out rates, providing a limited connection between acceptability and completion. The Conclusions say evidence on acceptability was sparse, and the paper does not establish that increasing acceptability improves treatment completion or effectiveness. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Computerised or digital CBT programmes have been shown to be effective in treating anxiety and depression in primary care settings in some studies but not all.

    “Computerised or digital CBT programmes have been shown to be effective in treating anxiety and depression in primary care settings in some21–24 but not all studies.25 26”

    From A study protocol for a non-randomised comparison trial evaluating the feasibility and effectiveness of a mobile cognitive-behavioural programme with integrated coaching for anxious adults in primary care (2018) · cites this paper as [24]

    The Psychological outcomes section (page not available) reports that computerised CBT improved depression outcomes in some trials but not in one ODIN trial. The Method section limits the review to adults with mild to moderate depression, with or without anxiety; it does not establish effectiveness for anxiety as a separate condition. Nor does it establish that all the trials reporting mixed results took place in primary care. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Internet-based and computer-aided treatments are effective in treating a wide range of psychological problems, with effect sizes comparable to traditional psychological treatments.

    “Internet-based and computer-aided treatments have been shown to be effective in treating a wide range of psychological problems, and have effect sizes (ES) comparable to those found for more traditional types of psychological treatments [21-32].”

    From Feasibility of a personal health technology-based psychological intervention for men with stress and mood problems: Randomized controlled pilot trial (2013) · cites this paper as [29]

    The Conclusions report some evidence that computerised CBT is effective for depression, and the Psychological outcomes section describes improvements in several trials. The review is limited to depression, not a wide range of psychological problems; its Results list usual care, a depression education website and an attention placebo as comparators, and it does not establish effect sizes comparable to traditional psychological treatments. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Among the wider CCBT evidence base, low uptake has been identified as a key barrier to implementation, with an average of 12% of participants offered CCBT commencing treatment.

    “Among the wider CCBT evidence base, low uptake has been identified as a key barrier to implementation, with an average of 12% of participants offered CCBT commencing treatment [26,51,52].”

    From Computerized cognitive behavior therapy for anxiety and depression in rural areas:a systematic review (2015) · cites this paper as [51]

    The Drop-out rates section raises recruitment and willingness to try CCBT as possible implementation concerns. It does not report that an average of 12% of people offered CCBT commenced treatment; its reported percentages concern drop-out after enrolment, not uptake. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

1 of the 18 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. National Health Service Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Improving the recognition and management of depression in primary care. Eff Health Care 2002; 7: 1-11.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kaltenthaler, E., Parry, G., Beverley, C., & Ferriter, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
  • Rampton Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Kaltenthaler, Eva
Venue
British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2008-09
Volume
193
Issue
3
Pages
181-184
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2157606892
Cited by
206
References
18
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 20
FWCI
1.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • Health Technology Assessment Programme
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
computerized cognitive behavioral therapy, depression, mild to moderate depression, online therapy, treatment effectiveness, dropout rates, acceptability
MeSH terms
Adult, Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, 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