Cited by 14Digital Mental Health InterventionsCOVID-19 and Mental HealthAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Efficacy of online-based intervention for anxiety during COVID-19: A systematic review and Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Open access
Kurniawan, Kurniawan, Yosep, Iyus, Maulana, Sidik, Mulyana, Aep Maulid, Amirah, Shakira, Abdurrahman, Muhammad Fahd, Sugianti, Aulia, Putri, Enzel Gabriela +4 more·2022·Sustainability

Abstract

COVID-19 has caused widespread psychological suffering. Anxiety is one of the several psychological disorders that are escalating globally, yet social distance constraints restrict in-person mental health therapy. Anxiety and other psychological disorders whose treatments are limited due to social distancing continue to grow, so there is an increasing need to use mental healthcare that can be offered remotely, especially in the pandemic era. This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of online-based interventions for anxiety during COVID-19. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA). We collected data from three databases, namely PubMed, CINAHL, and Oxford Library Press, published in 2020–2022. Additionally, we collected data using the snowball technique. This meta-analysis analyzed the pooled mean difference (MD) and its p-value using random-effects models. Critical appraisal and risk of bias were assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias (Rob) 2. We retrieved 34 RCTs for systematic review and 14 RCTs for meta-analysis, yielding 9159 participants for general anxiety disorder (GAD-7) measurement and 1303 participants for depression anxiety stress scale (DASS-21) measurement. This study shows that online-based interventions significantly reduce GAD-7 score (a pooled MD of 1.30; 95% CI: 2.83–4.65; p = 0.00001) and insignificantly reduce DASS-21 (0.05; 95% CI: −2.63–2.72; p = 0.97) according to pre- and post-test in intervention group. Additionally, there is a significant difference between the intervention and control groups, where the intervention group performed statistically progressively better than the controls (−7.26; 95% CI: −11.58–−2.95; p = 0.001) (−2.08; 95% CI: −6.71–2.55; p = 0.001). Online-based interventions have proved effective for reducing general anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic. Consequently, this meta-analysis can be adapted as a model for mental health services in the new normal.

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 · 10.3390/su141912866

Cites

44 of 44 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?

  • Similar Internet-based self-guided interventions to reduce depressive and anxious symptomatology have shown promising results.

    “Similar Internet-based self-guided interventions to reduce depressive and anxious symptomatology have shown promising results (Taylor et al., 2021; Kurniawan et al., 2022).”

    From Internet-based self-administered intervention to reduce anxiety and depression symptomatology and improve well-being in 7 countries: protocol of a randomized control trial (2024) · cites this paper as Kurniawan et al., 2022

    The Introduction (page unavailable) describes internet-based self-help as suitable for improving mental health and reducing anxiety. The Discussion (page unavailable) calls online interventions promising for anxiety and depression, but does not establish that the self-guided interventions specifically reduced depressive symptoms. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

3 of the 47 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Otared, N.; Moharrampour, N.G.; Vojoudi, B.; Najafabadi, A.J. A Group-based Online Acceptance and Commitment Therapy Treatment for Depression, Anxiety Symptoms and Quality of Life in Healthcare Workers during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Randomized Controlled Trial Nastaran. J. Energy 2021, 21, 399-411.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kurniawan, K., Yosep, I., Maulana, S., Mulyana, A. M., Amirah, S., Abdurrahman, M. F., Sugianti, A., Putri, E. G., Khoirunnisa, K., Komariah, M., Kohar, K., & Rahayuwati, L.
Affiliations
  • Padjadjaran University (ID)
  • University of Indonesia (ID)
Corresponding author
Maulana, Sidik
Venue
Sustainability
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-10-09
Volume
14
Issue
19
Pages
12866
ISSN
2071-1050 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4304184272
Cited by
14
References
47
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1
FWCI
0.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sustainability (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Directorate of Research and Community Engagement, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
anxiety, COVID-19 pandemic, generalized anxiety disorder, depression, stress, remote mental health care, social distancing, digital mental health

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