Cited by 190Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and Access

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Efficacy, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of self-help interventions for anxiety disorders: systematic review

Open access
Lewis, Catrin, Pearce, Jennifer, Bisson, Jonathan I.·2012·British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: Self-help interventions for psychiatric disorders represent an increasingly popular alternative to therapist-administered psychological therapies, offering the potential of increased access to cost-effective treatment. Aims: To determine the efficacy, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of self-help interventions for anxiety disorders. Method: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of self-help interventions for anxiety disorders were identified by searching nine online databases. Studies were grouped according to disorder and meta-analyses were conducted where sufficient data were available. Overall meta-analyses of self-help v.waiting list and therapist-administered treatment were also undertaken. Methodological quality was assessed independently by two researchers according to criteria set out by the Cochrane Collaboration. Results: Thirty-one RCTs met inclusion criteria for the review. Results of the overall meta-analysis comparing self-help with waiting list gave a significant effect size of 0.84 in favour of self-help. Comparison of self-help with therapist-administered treatments revealed a significant difference in favour of the latter with an effect size of 0.34. The addition of guidance and the presentation of multimedia or web-based self-help materials improved treatment outcome. Conclusions: Self-help interventions appear to be an effective way of treating individuals diagnosed with social phobia and panic disorder. Further research is required to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and acceptability of these interventions.

Overview

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.110.084756

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Higgins, 2009, Cochrane Handbook For Systematic Reviews Of Interventions (Version 5.0.2)
  2. Goldberg, 1997, The General Practitioner, the Psychiatrist and the Burden of Mental Health Care

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 190

Metadata

Authors
Lewis, C., Pearce, J., & Bisson, J. I.
Affiliations
Cardiff University (GB)
Corresponding author
Lewis, Catrin
Venue
British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2012-01
Volume
200
Issue
1
Pages
15-21
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2166049192
Cited by
189
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 3
FWCI
4.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
self-help intervention, anxiety disorders, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder, cost-effectiveness, acceptability, waiting list comparison, treatment efficacy
MeSH terms
Anxiety Disorders, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Mental Health Services, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Self Care, Waiting Lists, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Databases, Bibliographic, 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