Generative AI-Enabled Therapy Support Tool Improves Clinical Outcomes and Patient Engagement in NHS Talking Therapies
Open accessAbstract
Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is a highly effective treatment for depression and anxiety disorders. Nonetheless, a substantial proportion of patients do not respond to treatment. The lack of engagement with therapeutic materials and exercises between sessions - a necessary component of CBT - is a key determinant of unsuccessful treatment. Here we tested whether the deployment of a generative artificial intelligence (AI) powered personalised therapy support tool supporting patients in between sessions leads to improved treatment success and patient engagement with treatment. We conducted a real-world observational study of 137 patients receiving CBT in five of the UK’s National Health Service (NHS) Talking Therapies services. Ninety-three patients (68%) used the AI-enabled therapy support tool whilst forty-four patients were provided with the standard CBT worksheets. Patients using the AI-enabled therapy support tool exhibited greater attendance at therapy sessions and fewer dropouts from treatment. Furthermore, these patients demonstrated higher reliable improvement, recovery and reliable recovery rates when compared to the control group. Within the intervention group, the degree of usage of the AI-enabled tool was directly related to the number of attended therapy sessions and reduced dropouts. Our results thus show that an AI-enabled, personalised support tool is a promising avenue to improve treatment outcomes and patient adherence.
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?
Emerging primary studies suggest that GenAI mental health chatbots can improve engagement and adherence by supporting between-session cognitive behavioral therapy tasks and delivering positive psychology interventions, such as gratitude or self-reflection exercises.
“Emerging primary studies suggest that GenAI mental health chatbots can improve engagement and adherence by supporting between-session cognitive behavioral therapy tasks [23] and delivering positive psychology interventions, such as gratitude or self-reflection exercises [24].”
From Generative AI Mental Health Chatbots as Therapeutic Tools: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Their Role in Reducing Mental Health Issues (2025) · cites this paper as [23]
The remainder used quasi-experimental (n=5), mixed-methods (n=3), survey (n=2), and observational design (n=1).
“while the remainder used quasi-experimental (n=5), mixed-methods (n=3), survey (n=2) [26], and observational design (n=1) [23].”
From Generative AI Mental Health Chatbots as Therapeutic Tools: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Their Role in Reducing Mental Health Issues (2025) · cites this paper as [23]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 33 · Cited by 7
Research works printed but not linked: 22
- Butler, A. C., Chapman, J. E., Forman, E. M., & Beck, A. T. (2006). The empirical status of cognitive-behavioral therapy: A review of meta-analyses. Clinical Psychology Review, 26(1), 17-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2005.07.003 · DOI · Paper page
- Cronin, T. J., Lawrence, K. A., Taylor, K., Norton, P. J., & Kazantzis, N. (2015). Integrating Between-Session Interventions (Homework) in Therapy: The Importance of the Therapeutic Relationship and Cognitive Case Conceptualization. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 71(5), 439-450. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22180 · DOI
- Davis, A., Smith, T., Talbot, J., Eldridge, C., & Betts, D. (2020). Predicting patient engagement in IAPT services: A statistical analysis of electronic health records. Evidence-Based Mental Health, 23(1), 8-14. https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmental-2019-300133 · DOI
- Demszky, D., Yang, D., Yeager, D. S., Bryan, C. J., Clapper, M., Chandhok, S., Eichstaedt, J. C., Hecht, C., Jamieson, J., Johnson, M., Jones, M., Krettek-Cobb, D., Lai, L., JonesMitchell, N., Ong, D. C., Dweck, C. S., Gross, J. J., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2023). Using large language models in psychology. Nature Reviews Psychology, 2(11), 688-701. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-023-00241-5 · DOI · Paper page
- Fanous, M., & Daniels, J. (2020). What are the recovery and attrition outcomes for group CBT and individual CBT for generalised anxiety disorder in an IAPT service? An exploratory study. The Cognitive Behaviour Therapist, 13, e15. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1754470X20000045 · DOI
- Glenn, D., Golinelli, D., Rose, R. D., Roy-Byrne, P., Stein, M. B., Sullivan, G., Bystritksy, A., Sherbourne, C., & Craske, M. G. (2013). Who Gets the Most Out of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Anxiety Disorders? Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 81(4), 639-649. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033403 · DOI · Paper page
- Hans, E., & Hiller, W. (2013). Effectiveness of and dropout from outpatient cognitive behavioral therapy for adult unipolar depression: A meta-analysis of nonrandomized effectiveness studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 81(1), 75-88. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031080 · DOI · Paper page
- Henson, P., Wisniewski, H., Hollis, C., Keshavan, M., & Torous, J. (2019). Digital mental health apps and the therapeutic alliance: Initial review. BJPsych Open, 5(1), e15. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2018. · DOI
- Hofmann, S. G., Asnaani, A., Vonk, I. J. J., Sawyer, A. T., & Fang, A. (2012). The Efficacy of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy: A Review of Meta-analyses. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 36(5), 427-440. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-012-9476-1 · DOI · Paper page
- Kazantzis, N., Deane, F. P., & Ronan, K. R. (2004). Assessing compliance with homework assignments: Review and recommendations for clinical practice. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60(6), 627-641. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.10239 · DOI
- Kazantzis, N., Whittington, C., Zelencich, L., Kyrios, M., Norton, P. J., & Hofmann, S. G. (2016). Quantity and Quality of Homework Compliance: A Meta-Analysis of Relations With Outcome in Cognitive Behavior Therapy. Behavior Therapy, 47(5), 755-772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2016.05.002 · DOI · Paper page
- Mohr, D. C., Burns, M. N., Schueller, S. M., Clarke, G., & Klinkman, M. (2013). Behavioral Intervention Technologies: Evidence review and recommendations for future research in mental health. General Hospital Psychiatry, 35(4), 332-338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2013.03.008 · DOI · Paper page
- Newton, A., Bagnell, A., Rosychuk, R., Duguay, J., Wozney, L., Huguet, A., Henderson, J., & Curran, J. (2020). A Mobile Phone-Based App for Use During Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Adolescents With Anxiety (MindClimb): User-Centered Design and Usability Study. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 8(12), e18439. https://doi.org/10.2196/18439 · DOI
- Rollwage, M., Habicht, J., Juchems, K., Carrington, B., Hauser, T. U., & Harper, R. (2024). Conversational AI facilitates mental health assessments and is associated with improved recovery rates. BMJ Innovations, bmjinnov. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjinnov-2023-001110 · DOI
- Rollwage, M., Habicht, J., Juechems, K., Carrington, B., Viswanathan, S., Stylianou, M., Hauser, T. U., & Harper, R. (2023). Using Conversational AI to Facilitate Mental Health Assessments and Improve Clinical Efficiency Within Psychotherapy Services: Real-World Observational Study. JMIR AI, 2(1), e44358. https://doi.org/10.2196/44358 · DOI
- Spitzer, R. L., Kroenke, K., Williams, J. B. W., & Löwe, B. (2006). A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: The GAD-7. Archives of Internal Medicine, 166(10), 1092-1097. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092 · DOI · Paper page
- Steel, Z., Marnane, C., Iranpour, C., Chey, T., Jackson, J. W., Patel, V., & Silove, D. (2014). The global prevalence of common mental disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis 1980-2013. International Journal of Epidemiology, 43(2), 476-493. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyu038 · DOI · Paper page
- Steen, S. (2020). A cost-benefit analysis of the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies programme using its key defining outcomes. Journal of Health Psychology, 25(13-14), 2487-2498. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105318803751 · DOI
- Tang, W., & Kreindler, D. (2017). Supporting Homework Compliance in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy: Essential Features of Mobile Apps. JMIR Mental Health, 4(2), e20. https://doi.org/10.2196/mental.5283 · DOI
- Toyomoto, R., Sakata, M., Yoshida, K., Luo, Y., Nakagami, Y., Uwatoko, T., Shimamoto, T., Sahker, E., Tajika, A., Suga, H., Ito, H., Sumi, M., Muto, T., Ito, M., Ichikawa, H., Ikegawa, M., Shiraishi, N., Watanabe, T., Watkins, E. R., … Furukawa, T. A. (2023). Prognostic factors and effect modifiers for personalisation of internet-based cognitive behavioural therapy among university students with subthreshold depression: A secondary analysis of a factorial trial. Journal of Affective Disorders, 322, 156-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2022.11.024 · DOI
- Trivedi, M. H., Rush, A. J., Wisniewski, S. R., Nierenberg, A. A., Warden, D., Ritz, L., Norquist, G., Howland, R. H., Lebowitz, B., McGrath, P. J., Shores-Wilson, K., Biggs, M. M., Balasubramani, G. K., & Fava, M. (2006). Evaluation of Outcomes With Citalopram for Depression Using Measurement-Based Care in STAR*D: Implications for Clinical Practice. American Journal of Psychiatry, 163(1), 28-40. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.163.1.28 · DOI · Paper page
- Valentine, L., D'Alfonso, S., & Lederman, R. (2023). Recommender systems for mental health apps: Advantages and ethical challenges. AI & SOCIETY, 38(4), 1627-1638. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01322-w · DOI
- Authors
- Habicht, J., Dina, L. M., Stylianou, M., Harper, R., Hauser, T. U., & Rollwage, M.
- Affiliations
- Max Planck Society (DE)
- Publisher
- Center for Open Science
- Published
- 2024-04-10
- OpenAlex
- W4394681077
- Cited by
- 7
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Keywords
- generative AI, cognitive behavioral therapy, patient engagement, treatment discontinuation, therapy attendance, medication adherence, depression, anxiety disorders, NHS Talking Therapies
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
