Trial reportTrends in psychiatry and psychotherapy2025
Randomized clinical trial comparing the effects of an asynchronous mobile application to guided brief cognitive behavioral therapy for managing anxiety among medical students.
Trial report in Trends in psychiatry and psychotherapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of evidence based mental health apps on user health outcome: A systematic literature review.PloS one · 2025Pooled it
- Prevalence, Digital Tools, and Management Strategies for Depression in Medical Students: A Narrative Review.Advances in medical education and practice · 2026Review
- Digital Health Interventions for Depression and Anxiety in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Rapid Scoping Review.JMIR mental health · 2025Article
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse events in clinical trials of mental health apps.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveMedical students are a population at increased risk for anxiety due to their demanding schedule and concerns about potential stigmatization, which often discourage them from seeking help. It has been reported that the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic worsened this issue by restricting social interaction and mobility. An innovative method has been developed to address this problem, known as the asynchronous Digital Cognitive Education Gadjah Mada Anxiety Intervention for Medical Students (DCE GAMA-AIMS). Compared to traditional therapy, this modality can be accessed independently without the guidance of a therapist. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of DCE GAMA-AIMS compared to therapist-guided brief cognitive behavioral therapy (bCBT) for reducing anxiety scores.
methodsA non-blinded randomized clinical trial (RCT) was conducted with 66 medical students. The participants were equally divided into two groups, an intervention and a control group. The intervention group was given DCE GAMA-AIMS, while guided bCBT was administered to the controls. The data obtained were analyzed using independent t tests and analysis of variance (ANOVA).
resultsThe application had a significant effect, reducing anxiety scores from the 2nd week (M Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale [TMAS] = 18) to the 8th week (M TMAS = 13). A faster and more significant improvement was observed in the intervention group from the 1st to the 2nd week compared to the controls, who began to improve in the 4th week. Furthermore, the intervention group had larger effect size (1.32) compared to the control (0.79) from the 1st to 8th weeks.
conclusionAsynchronous DCE GAMA-AIMS and guided bCBT both reduced TMAS scores in medical students with anxiety, but DCE GAMA-AIMS yielded a larger effect size.
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.