Web-based cognitive behavioral therapy blended with face-to-face sessions for major depression: randomized controlled trial
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses of several randomized controlled trials have shown that cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) has comparable efficacy to antidepressant medication, but therapist availability and cost-effectiveness is a problem. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of Web-based CBT blended with face-to-face sessions that reduce therapist time in patients with major depression who were unresponsive to antidepressant medications. METHODS: A 12-week, assessor-masked, parallel-group, waiting- list controlled, randomized trial was conducted at 3 medical institutions in Tokyo. Outpatients aged 20-65 years with a primary diagnosis of major depression who were taking ≥1 antidepressant medications at an adequate dose for ≥6 weeks and had a 17-item GRID-Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) score of ≥14 were randomly assigned (1:1) to blended CBT or waiting-list groups using a computer allocation system, stratified by the study site with the minimization method, to balance age and baseline GRID-HAMD score. The CBT intervention was given in a combined format, comprising a Web-based program and 12 45-minute face-to-face sessions. Thus, across 12 weeks, a participant could receive up to 540 minutes of contact with a therapist, which is approximately two-thirds of the therapist contact time provided in the conventional CBT protocol, which typically provides 16 50-minute sessions. The primary outcome was the alleviation of depressive symptoms, as measured by a change in the total GRID-HAMD score from baseline (at randomization) to posttreatment (at 12 weeks). Moreover, in an exploratory analysis, we investigated whether the expected positive effects of the intervention were sustained during follow-up, 3 months after the posttreatment assessment. Analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis, and the primary outcome was analyzed using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures. RESULTS: We randomized 40 participants to either blended CBT (n=20) or waiting-list (n=20) groups. All patients completed the 12-week treatment protocol and were included in the intention-to-treat analyses. Participants in the blended CBT group had significantly alleviated depressive symptoms at week 12, as shown by greater least squares mean changes in the GRID-HAMD score, than those in the waiting list group (-8.9 points vs -3.0 points; mean between-group difference=-5.95; 95% CI -9.53 to -2.37; P<.001). The follow-up effects within the blended CBT group, as measured by the GRID-HAMD score, were sustained at the 3-month follow-up (week 24) and posttreatment (week 12): posttreatment, 9.4 (SD 5.2), versus follow-up, 7.2 (SD 5.7); P=.009. CONCLUSIONS: Although our findings warrant confirmation in larger and longer term studies with active controls, these suggest that a combined form of CBT is effective in reducing depressive symptoms in patients with major depression who are unresponsive to antidepressant medications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry: UMIN000009242; https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000010852 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation. org/729VkpyYL).
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Differences between mental health treatment systems could have contributed to mixed results in blended care trials conducted outside Europe.
“Moreover, differences between mental health treatment systems could have contributed to mixed results in blended care trials conducted outside Europe [253341-43undefinedundefined].”
From Needs and Expectations for the myNewWay Blended Digital and Face-to-Face Psychotherapy Model of Care for Depression and Anxiety (Part 2): Participatory Design Study including Mental Health Professionals (2025) · cites this paper as [41]
The Discussion (page unavailable) suggests that Japan’s shortage of trained therapists and limited insurance coverage for CBT may have raised participants’ expectations and contributed to high adherence. It does not compare treatment systems across countries or link those differences to mixed results in trials outside Europe. (LLM, conf=0.78)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredBoth before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, mixed results were found for blended RCTs outside of Europe in other high-income countries, such as the United States, Japan, and Australia.
“However, both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, mixed results were found for blended RCTs outside of Europe in other high-income countries, such as the United States, Japan, and Australia [253341-43undefinedundefined].”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 49 · Cited by 45
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- [21]Oguchi Yoshiyo Cognitive Behavior Therapy by internet or telephone Japanese Journal of Psychiatric Treatment 2015 30 5 674 677
- [29]American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition 1994 Washington, DC American Psychiatric Association A
- Authors
- Nakao, S., Nakagawa, A., Oguchi, Y., Mitsuda, D., Kato, N., Nakagawa, Y., Tamura, N., Kudo, Y., Abe, T., Hiyama, M., Iwashita, S., Ono, Y., & Mimura, M.
- Affiliations
- Keio University (JP)
- St. Marianna University School of Medicine (JP)
- Tokyo Medical Center (JP)
- Corresponding author
- Nakagawa, Atsuo
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of Medical Internet Research
- Publisher
- JMIR Publications Inc.
- Published
- 2018-09-21
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- e10743
- ISSN
- 1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6231848
- OpenAlex
- W2890291749
- Cited by
- 45
- References
- 49
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 3.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (17K04452, 18K13329)
- 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 › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
- Keywords
- cognitive behavioral therapy, online therapy, blended therapy, major depressive disorder, antidepressant-refractory depression, treatment-resistant depression, depressive symptoms, maintenance of treatment effects, outpatients, cost-effectiveness, waiting list control group, follow-up outcomes, relapse prevention
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Major Depressive Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Major, Female, Humans, Male, 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