Cited by 98Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Predictors of Symptomatic Change and Adherence in Internet-Based Cognitive Behaviour Therapy for Social Anxiety Disorder in Routine Psychiatric Care

Open access
El Alaoui, Samir, Ljótsson, Brjánn, Hedman, Erik, Kaldo, Viktor, Andersson, Evelyn, Rück, Christian, Andersson, Gerhard, Lindefors, Nils·2015·PLOS ONE

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: A central goal of health care is to improve patient outcomes. Although several studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of therapist guided internet-based cognitive behaviour therapy (ICBT) for social anxiety disorder (SAD), a significant proportion of patients do not respond to treatment. Consequently, the aim of this study was to identify individual characteristics and treatment program related factors that could help clinicians predict treatment outcomes and adherence for individuals with SAD. METHOD: The sample comprised longitudinal data collected during a 4-year period of adult individuals (N = 764) treated for SAD at a public service psychiatric clinic. Weekly self-rated Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS-SR) scores were provided. Rates of symptomatic change during treatment and adherence levels were analysed using multilevel modelling. The following domains of prognostic variables were examined: (a) socio-demographic variables; (b) clinical characteristics; (c) family history of mental illness; and (d) treatment-related factors. RESULTS: Higher treatment credibility and adherence predicted a faster rate of improvement during treatment, whereas higher overall functioning level evidenced a slower rate of improvement. Treatment credibility was the strongest predictor of greater adherence. Having a family history of SAD-like symptoms was also associated with greater adherence, whereas Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)-like symptoms, male gender, and family history of minor depression predicted lower adherence. Also, the amount of therapist time spent per treatment module was negatively associated with adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Results from a large clinical sample indicate that the credibility of ICBT is the strongest prognostic factor explaining individual differences in both adherence level and symptomatic improvement. Early screening of ADHD-like symptoms may help clinicians identify patients who might need extra support or an adjusted treatment. Therapist behaviours that promote adherence may be important for treatment response, although more research is needed in order to determine what type of support would be most beneficial.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0124258

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?

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 61 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
El Alaoui, S., Ljótsson, B., Hedman, E., Kaldo, V., Andersson, E., Rück, C., Andersson, G., & Lindefors, N.
Affiliations
  • Karolinska Institutet (SE)
  • Linköping University (SE)
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2015-04-20
Volume
10
Issue
4
Pages
e0124258
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2081402562
Cited by
98
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 3
FWCI
16.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DiVA (Linkoping University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Stockholms Läns Landsting
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 › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
social anxiety disorder, internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy, medication adherence, treatment response prediction, treatment credibility, prognostic factors, family history of mental illness, ADHD-like symptoms, Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale
MeSH terms
Distance Counseling, Adult, Anxiety Disorders, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Mental Health Services, Patient Compliance, Predictive Value of Tests, Prognosis, Surveys and Questionnaires, Social Class, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, 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