ArticleJournal of clinical psychology2023
More than one way to say I love you: An Internet-based intervention for training flexible thinking in romantic relationships.
Article in Journal of clinical psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A mixed methods evaluation of a pilot open trial of a mentor-guided digital intervention for youth anxiety.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study developed and pilot-tested an adaptation of Cognitive Bias Modification (CBM) to target two aspects of relational flexibility in couples: the ability to generate alternative perspectives, and the ability to respond nondefensively when alternative partner perspectives are raised within challenging relationship situations (referred to as flexibility in partner perspectives).
methodsCBM-FlexC training materials were developed in Phase 1, and expert users (N = 4) and end-point users (N = 7) provided qualitative feedback. Feasibility and preliminary efficacy of CBM-FlexC were evaluated in Phase 2, using an online sample of distressed couples (N = 18). Using a multiple baseline design, participants completed three baseline assessments, six CBM-FlexC sessions over 2 weeks, and a 1-month follow-up.
resultsCBM-FlexC training resulted in greater flexibility in partner perspectives, relationship satisfaction, and general psychological flexibility compared to baseline, and improvements were maintained 1-month after training when using mixed-effects models. However, analyses of reliable change (based on graphical inspection and the Reliable Change Index) indicated that most participants did not experience reliable improvement in flexibility in partner perspectives, or relationship satisfaction.
conclusionThis pilot study provides some positive signals regarding the potential efficacy of CBM-FlexC, while pointing to the need for further development to strengthen its effects.
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.