Cited by 290Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation

Clinician-Assisted Internet-Based Treatment is Effective for Panic: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Wims, Edward, Titov, Nickolai, Andrews, Gavin, Choi, Isabella·2010·Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of an Internet-based clinician-assisted cognitive behavioural treatment program (the Panic program) for panic disorder (with or without agoraphobia). METHOD: Fifty-nine individuals meeting diagnostic criteria for panic disorder with agoraphobia were randomly assigned to a treatment group or to a waitlist control group. Treatment group participants completed the Panic program, comprising six on-line lessons, weekly homework assignments, received weekly email contact from a psychiatry registrar, and contributed to a moderated online discussion forum with other participants. An intention-to-treat model was used for data analyses. RESULTS: Twenty-three (79%) of treatment group participants completed all lessons within the 8-week program, and post-treatment data were collected from 22/29 treatment group and 22/25 waitlist group participants. Compared to the control group, treatment group participants reported significantly reduced symptoms of panic as measured by the Panic Disorder Severity Scale, Body Sensation Questionnaire, and Agoraphobic Cognitions Questionnaires. Significant reductions were also reported on measures of disability and depression. The mean within- and between-group effect size (Cohen's d) on the Panic Disorder Severity Scale was 0.93 and 0.59, respectively, and effects were sustained at 1-month follow-up. Mean therapist time per participant was 75 minutes for the program. CONCLUSIONS: These results replicate those from the open trial of the Panic Program indicating the efficacy of the Internet-based clinician-assisted cognitive behavioural treatment program for panic disorder with agoraphobia.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3109/00048671003614171

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wims, E., Titov, N., Andrews, G., & Choi, I.
Affiliations
  • St Vincent's Hospital Sydney (AU)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Titov, Nickolai
Venue
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2010-07
Volume
44
Issue
7
Pages
599-607
ISSN
  • 0004-8674 (ISSN-L)
  • 1440-1614
OpenAlex
W2118402635
Cited by
290
References
63
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 32 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 26
FWCI
44.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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
panic disorder, agoraphobia, online therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, treatment efficacy, depression, symptom severity
MeSH terms
Adult, Agoraphobia, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Panic Disorder, Treatment Outcome, Remote Consultation, Internet, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Intention to Treat Analysis

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