Cited by 18Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation

When ‘e’ therapy enters the hospital: Examination of the feasibility and acceptability of SPARX (a cCBT programme) in an adolescent inpatient unit

Bobier, Candace, Stasiak, Karolina, Mountford, Helen, Merry, Sally, Moor, Stephanie·2013·Advances in Mental Health

Abstract

Background: Recently, advances in computer technology have made it possible to deliver evidence-based psychological therapies in a computerised self-help format – a promising approach in the treatment of depression in children and adolescents. We examine the feasibility and acceptability of offering SPARX (smart, positive, active, realistic, X-factor thoughts), a computerised cognitive behavioural therapy tool in an inpatient setting to adolescent patients who typically experience a greater severity of mental illness than in previous trials of computerised therapy. Method: Adolescent patients admitted to hospital for treatment were invited to use SPARX when their mental state had stabilized and they were able to use the computer programme with minimal assistance. We considered uptake and adherence rates and patient-rated satisfaction with the programme and collected demographic descriptive information.Results: Most patients who were offered therapy agreed to trial SPARX, with 60% continuing beyond the fi rst module and 10% completing the programme prior to discharge. Patients who completed only one or two modules cited lack of interest and perceived utility as reasons for discontinuation whereas those who completed three or more modules discontinued because of lack of access to SPARX after discharge from hospital. Conclusion: The study’s small sample limits the generalizability of the fi ndings but the results suggest that it is feasible to offer e-therapy in an inpatient unit and patients are generally interested in trying it. Practical aspects such as timing of delivery and participation in other therapies likely impact on completion rates.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5172/jamh.2013.11.3.286

Cites

6 of 6 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

2 of the 8 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bobier, C., Stasiak, K., Mountford, H., Merry, S., & Moor, S.
Affiliations
  • Princess Margaret Hospital (NZ)
  • University of Auckland (NZ)
Venue
Advances in Mental Health
Published
2013-06
Volume
11
Issue
3
Pages
286-292
ISSN
  • 1446-7984 (ISSN-L)
  • 1838-7357
  • 1837-4905
OpenAlex
W2082235153
Cited by
18
References
8
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1
FWCI
1.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Advances in Mental Health (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
SPARX, computerized cognitive behavioral therapy, e-therapy, adolescent depression, psychiatric inpatient care, feasibility, acceptability, medication adherence, program completion, patient satisfaction

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