Cited by 152Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and Access

Effectiveness of an Online Group Course for Depression in Adolescents and Young Adults: A Randomized Trial

Open access
van der Zanden, Rianne, Kramer, Jeannet, Gerrits, Rob, Cuijpers, Pim·2012·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Depression is a serious mental health problem, whose first onset is usually in adolescence. Online treatment may offer a solution for the current undertreatment of depression in youth. For adults with depressive symptoms, the effectiveness of Internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy has been demonstrated. This study is one of the first randomized controlled trials to investigate the effectiveness online depression treatment for young people with depressive complaints and the first to focus on an online group course. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and discuss the effectiveness of a guided Web-based group course called Grip op Je Dip (Master Your Mood [MYM]), designed for young people aged 16 to 25 years with depressive symptoms, in comparison with a wait-listed control group. METHODS: We randomly assigned 244 young people with depressive symptoms to the online MYM course or to a waiting-list control condition. The primary outcome measure was treatment outcome after 3 months on the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale. Secondary outcomes were anxiety (measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) and mastery (Mastery Scale). We studied the maintenance of effects in the MYM group 6 months after baseline. Missing data were imputed. RESULTS: The MYM group (n = 121) showed significantly greater improvement in depressive symptoms at 3 months than the control group (n = 123) (t(187 )= 6.62, P < .001), with a large between-group effect size of d = 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-1.23). The MYM group also showed greater improvement in anxiety (t(187 )= 3.80, P < .001, d = 0.49, 95% CI 0.24-0.75) and mastery (t(187 )= 3.36, P = .001, d = 0.44, 95% CI 0.19-0.70). At 12 weeks, 56% (68/121) of the participants in the MYM group and 20% (24/123) in the control group showed reliable and clinically significant change. This between-group difference was significant (χ(2) (1 )= 35.0, P < .001) and yielded a number needed to treat of 2.7. Improvements in the MYM group were maintained at 6 months. A limitation is the infeasibility of comparing the 6-month outcomes of the MYM and control groups, as the controls had access to MYM after 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: The online group course MYM was effective in reducing depressive symptoms and anxiety and in increasing mastery in young people. These effects persisted in the MYM group at 6 months.

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 · 10.2196/jmir.2033

Cites

63 of 63 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?

  • Higher pre-test scores in depression, a longer history of mood disorders, or low scores in anxiety at pre-test predicted greater adherence.

    “Mental health also played a role, with higher pre-test scores in depression (57), a longer history of mood disorders (51), or low scores in anxiety at pre-test (70) predicting greater adherence.”

    From What Works and What Doesn’t Work? A Systematic Review of Digital Mental Health Interventions for Depression and Anxiety in Young People (2019) · cites this paper as [70]

    In Results > Sessions Attended and Outcome (page not provided), participants who attended at least one session had higher baseline depression scores than nonattendees (33.2 versus 29.6). The difference was reported only at the P < .10 threshold (P = .06), and the passage does not establish that higher scores predicted greater adherence across session counts. This citation is attached to the depression-score clause, not the separate claims about mood-disorder history or anxiety. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Gender was a consistent predictor of adherence, with females being more likely to complete compared to males.

    “Gender was also a consistent predictor of adherence, with females being more likely to complete compared to males (51, 57, 70).”

    From What Works and What Doesn’t Work? A Systematic Review of Digital Mental Health Interventions for Depression and Anxiety in Young People (2019) · cites this paper as [70]

    The Results > Attrition section reports that males were more likely than females to miss the 24-week follow-up questionnaire, supporting a gender difference in assessment completion. It found no significant difference between completers and noncompleters at 12 weeks, however, and Results > Sessions Attended and Outcome does not link gender to course attendance or completion. The source therefore does not establish gender as a consistent predictor of adherence to the course. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Online education and behavior change interventions have reported improvements in health outcomes.

    “online education and behavior change interventions have reported improvements in health outcomes [9,12]”

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: 1

  1. [28]Barak A Wander-Schwartz M Journal of Virtual Environments 2000 2010-08-24 Empirical Evaluation of Brief Group Therapy Conducted in an Internet Chat Room http://construct.haifa.ac.il/~azy/cherapy.htm

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van der Zanden, R., Kramer, J., Gerrits, R., & Cuijpers, P.
Affiliations
  • Trimbos Institute (NL)
  • Dimence (NL)
  • Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2012-06-07
Volume
14
Issue
3
Pages
e86
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2130438969
Cited by
152
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 3
FWCI
17.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Digital Academic REpository of VU University Amsterdam (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
ZonMw (61300036)
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 › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
depression, adolescents, young adults, internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy, depressive symptoms, anxiety, mastery, maintenance therapy, waitlist control, number needed to treat, treatment effectiveness, child and adolescent mental health services, helplessness
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Depression, Educational Status, Female, Humans, Male, Waiting Lists, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Internet, Young Adult

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