ArticleJMIR mental health2022
Web-Based Single Session Intervention for Perceived Control Over Anxiety During COVID-19: Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in JMIR mental health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04459455 (Project HF-COVID), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Project HF-COVID: Evaluating Hyper-Brief, Online Materials During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- A crowdsourced megastudy of 12 digital single-session interventions for depression in US adults.Nature human behaviour · 2026Trial
- A randomized controlled trial comparing brief online self-guided interventions for loneliness.Journal of consulting and clinical psychology · 2025Trial
- Randomized trial of a single-session digital intervention targeting emotion-related beliefs and emotion regulation.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- In-person interview versus online self-assessment of the eating disorder examination: an empirical validation of data equivalence.Eating and weight disorders : EWD · 2026Article
- A Crowdsourced Megastudy of 12 Digital Single-Session Interventions for Depression in American Adults.Research square · 2025Article
- The role of self-efficacy in internet-based interventions for mental health: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Internet interventions · 2025Review
- We Have Spent Time, Money, and Effort Making Self-Help Digital Mental Health Interventions: Is Anyone Going to Come to the Party?Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Review
- Efficacy of an Unguided, Digital Single-Session Intervention for Internalizing Symptoms in Web-Based Workers: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Review
- A Digital Single-Session Intervention Platform for Youth Mental Health: Cultural Adaptation, Evaluation, and Dissemination.JMIR mental health · 2023Article
- Addressing the mental health impact of COVID-19 through population health.Clinical psychology review · 2021Review
- Acceptability and Utility of an Open-Access, Online Single-Session Intervention Platform for Adolescent Mental Health.JMIR mental health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAnxiety is rising across the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic, and social distancing mandates preclude in-person mental health care. Greater perceived control over anxiety has predicted decreased anxiety pathology, including adaptive responses to uncontrollable stressors. Evidence suggests that no-therapist, single-session interventions can strengthen perceived control over emotions like anxiety; similar programs, if designed for the COVID-19 context, could hold substantial public health value.
objectiveOur registered report evaluated a no-therapist, single-session, online intervention targeting perceived control over anxiety in the COVID-19 context against a placebo intervention encouraging handwashing. We tested whether the intervention could (1) decrease generalized anxiety and increase perceived control over anxiety and (2) achieve this without decreasing social-distancing intentions.
methodsWe tested these questions using a between-subjects design in a weighted-probability sample of US adults recruited via a closed online platform (ie, Prolific). All outcomes were indexed via online self-report questionnaires.
resultsOf 522 randomized individuals, 500 (95.8%) completed the baseline survey and intervention. Intent-to-treat analyses using all randomized participants (N=522) found no support for therapeutic or iatrogenic effects; effects on generalized anxiety were d=-0.06 (95% CI -0.27 to 0.15; P=.48), effects on perceived control were d=0.04 (95% CI -0.08 to 0.16; P=.48), and effects on social-distancing intentions were d=-0.02 (95% CI -0.23 to 0.19; P=.83).
conclusionsStrengths of this study included a large, nationally representative sample and adherence to open science practices. Implications for scalable interventions, including the challenge of targeting perceived control over anxiety, are discussed.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04459455; https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT04459455.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.