Cited by 599Digital Mental Health InterventionsTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Dropout from Internet‐based treatment for psychological disorders

Open access
Melville, Katherine M., Casey, Leanne M., Kavanagh, David J.·2010·British Journal of Clinical Psychology

Abstract

Purpose. The purpose of this review was to present an in‐depth analysis of literature identifying the extent of dropout from Internet‐based treatment programmes for psychological disorders, and literature exploring the variables associated with dropout from such programmes. Methods. A comprehensive literature search was conducted on PSYCHINFO and PUBMED with the keywords: dropouts, drop out, dropout, dropping out, attrition, premature termination, termination, non‐compliance, treatment, intervention, and program, each in combination with the key words Internet and web. A total of 19 studies published between 1990 and April 2009 and focusing on dropout from Internet‐based treatment programmes involving minimal therapist contact were identified and included in the review. Results. Dropout ranged from 2 to 83% and a weighted average of 31% of the participants dropped out of treatment. A range of variables have been examined for their association with dropout from Internet‐based treatment programmes for psychological disorders. Despite the numerous variables explored, evidence on any specific variables that may make an individual more likely to drop out of Internet‐based treatment is currently limited. Conclusions. This review highlights the need for more rigorous and theoretically guided research exploring the variables associated with dropping out of Internet‐based treatment for psychological disorders.

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 · 10.1348/014466509x472138

Cites

60 of 60 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 observed study dropout rate of 20% is above average compared to reported treatment dropout rates from efficacy studies among children and adolescents in an outpatient mental health care setting and from internet-based interventions for mental disorders in AYA.

    “We observed a study dropout rate of 20%. In comparison to reported treatment dropout rates from efficacy studies among children and adolescents in an outpatient mental health care setting [63] as well as to these reported from internet-based interventions for mental disorders in AYA [64, 65], this rate is above average.”

    From Feasibility and potential efficacy of a guided internet- and mobile-based CBT for adolescents and young adults with chronic medical conditions and comorbid depression or anxiety symptoms (youthCOACHCD): a randomized controlled pilot trial (2022) · cites this paper as [64]

    The Extent of Dropout section reports a weighted average treatment dropout rate of 35% and a median of 24%, both above the citing study’s 20%, rather than below it. The Data Selection section also says the review was restricted to adults, so it does not establish an average for adolescents and young adults (AYA). (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The dropout rate in this study was higher than in a previous study using NO-FEAR Airlines, but closer to dropout rates traditionally proposed in the literature and similar to previous studies with phobic patients.

    “This was a higher rate than the previous study using NO-FEAR Airlines (Campos et al., 2019), but closer to dropout rates traditionally proposed in the literature, where an average dropout rate of 31% has been reported (Melville et al., 2010), and similar to previous studies carried out with phobic patients, which report a 40.8% dropout rate (Kok et al., 2014).”

    From An internet-based treatment for flying phobia using 360° images: A feasibility pilot study (2022) · cites this paper as Melville et al., 2010

    The Melville et al. citation is attached to the reported average dropout rate of 31%. In “Extent of Dropout from Internet-based Psychological Treatment Programs” and “Summary and Limitations to Current Research” (pages not provided), the review instead reports an average of 35%; the comparisons attributed to the other cited studies are not at issue here. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The adherence rate was comparable to another self-guided study using a 9-module, 2-week online program (75%) and on the higher end of other guided internet-based treatment programs (average 31%, range 2%-83%).

    “This was comparable to another self-guided study using a 9-module, 2-week online program (75%; [27]) with similar financial incentives for the participants to take part, and on the higher end of other guided internet-based treatment programs (average adherence rates of 31%, range of 2%-83%) [37].”

    From Development and feasibility of a digital acceptance and commitment therapy⇓based intervention for generalized anxiety disorder: Pilot acceptability study (2021) · cites this paper as [37]

    The cited review’s “Extent of Dropout” section reports a 2%–83% range and a 35% weighted average for dropout, not adherence. It reviews programs with minimal therapist contact, so it does not establish the stated 31% average adherence rate for guided programs. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Melville and colleagues reported an average drop-out rate of 31% in a systematic review.

    “For instance, Melville and colleagues reported an average drop-out rate of 31% in a systematic review.50”

    From Clinical and cost-effectiveness of a guided internet-based Acceptance and Commitment Therapy to improve chronic pain-related disability in green professions (PACT-A): Study protocol of a pragmatic randomised controlled trial (2020) · cites this paper as [50]

    The Abstract and the ‘Extent of Dropout’ section report an average dropout rate of 35%, not 31%. The latter specifies that 35% is the weighted average across the studies reviewed. (LLM, conf=0.94)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • To avoid a loss of power, the sample size was increased for this study, taking into account an average drop-out rate of 31%.

    “To avoid a loss of power, the sample size was increased for this study, taking into account an average drop-out rate of 31%.50”

    From Clinical and cost-effectiveness of a guided internet-based Acceptance and Commitment Therapy to improve chronic pain-related disability in green professions (PACT-A): Study protocol of a pragmatic randomised controlled trial (2020) · cites this paper as [50]

    The review’s Extent of Dropout section reports a weighted average dropout rate of 35%, not 31%; its Summary and Limitations section also gives 35% as the average. The sentence’s decision to increase its own sample size is not a finding attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    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

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [4]4. Carlbring P, Westling BE, Ljungstrand P, Ekselius L, Andersson G. Treatment of panic disorder via the Internet:Arandomized trial of a self-help program. Behavior Therapy. 2001;32:751-764.
  2. [10]10. Garfield SL. Research on client variables in psychotherapy. In: Bergin AE, Garfield SL, eds. Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change. 4th ed. . New York: Wiley; 1994:190-228.
  3. [26]26. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition, text revision. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.
  4. [42]42. Cook JE, Doyle C. Working alliance in online therapy as compared to face-to-face therapy: preliminary results. Cyberpsychology and behavior the impact of the Internet, multimedia and virtual reality on behavior and society. 2002;5(2):95-105.
  5. [44]44. Blanchard EB. Psychological treatment of benign headache disorders. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology. 1992;60:537-451.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Melville, K. M., Casey, L. M., & Kavanagh, D. J.
Affiliations
  • Griffith University (AU)
  • Queensland University of Technology (AU)
Corresponding author
Melville, Katherine M.
Venue
British Journal of Clinical Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-11
Volume
49
Issue
4
Pages
455-471
ISSN
  • 0144-6657 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-8260
OpenAlex
W1601069999
Cited by
597
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 54 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 64 · 2020: 52 · 2019: 42 · 2018: 42 · 2017: 42 · 2016: 39 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 35 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 17
FWCI
1.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • QUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion)
  • Faculty of Health; Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
treatment discontinuation, attrition, online therapy, mental illness, predictors of dropout, medication adherence
MeSH terms
Anxiety Disorders, Mental Disorders, Cross-Sectional Studies, Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Male, Motivation, Patient Compliance, Patient Dropouts, Risk Factors, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Comorbidity, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, 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