ArticleTrials2024
Assessing the efficacy and safety of STOP (successful treatment for paranoia)-an app-based cognitive bias modification therapy for paranoia: a randomised clinical trial protocol.
Article in Trials, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Do Psychological Interventions Reduce Paranoia in Adolescents? A Systematic Review.Clinical child and family psychology review · 2026Review
- Process Evaluation of Digital Mental Health Interventions for Psychosis: Scoping Review With Framework Synthesis.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Transdiagnostic App-Based Cognitive Bias Modification Intervention for Paranoia (Successful Treatment of Paranoia; STOP): Protocol for a Mixed Methods Process Evaluation Embedded in a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- A Digital Mental Health Intervention for Paranoia (the STOP App): Qualitative Study on User Acceptability.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- How do users of a mental health app conceptualise digital therapeutic alliance? A qualitative study using the framework approach.BMC public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundParanoia, the belief that you are at risk of significant physical or emotional harm from others, is a common difficulty, which causes significant distress and impairment to daily functioning, including in psychosis-spectrum disorders. According to cognitive models of psychosis, paranoia may be partly maintained by cognitive processes, including interpretation biases. Cognitive bias modification for paranoia (CBM-pa) is an intervention targeting the bias towards interpreting ambiguous social scenarios in a way that is personally threatening. This study aims to test the efficacy and safety of a mobile app version of CBM-pa, called STOP (successful treatment of paranoia).
methodsThe STOP study is a double-blind, superiority, three-arm randomised controlled trial (RCT). People are eligible for the trial if they experience persistent, distressing paranoia, as assessed by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scales, and show evidence of an interpretation bias towards threat on standardised assessments. Participants are randomised to either STOP (two groups: 6- or 12-session dose) or text-reading control (12 sessions). Treatment as usual will continue for all participants. Sessions are completed weekly and last around 40 min. STOP is completely self-administered with no therapist assistance. STOP involves reading ambiguous social scenarios, all of which could be interpreted in a paranoid way. In each scenario, participants are prompted to consider more helpful alternatives by completing a word and answering a question. Participants are assessed at baseline, after each session, and at 6, 12, 18 and 24 weeks post-randomisation. The primary outcome is the self-reported severity of paranoid symptoms at 24 weeks, measured using the Paranoia Scale. The target sample size is 273 which is powered to detect a 15% symptom reduction on the primary outcome. The secondary outcomes are standardized measures of depression, anxiety and recovery and measures of interpretation bias. Safety is a primary outcome and measured by the Negative Effects Questionnaire and a checklist of adverse events completed fortnightly with researchers. The trial is conducted with the help of a Lived Experience Advisory Panel. DISCUSSION: This study will assess STOP's efficacy and safety. STOP has the potential to be an accessible intervention to complement other treatments for any conditions that involve significant paranoia.
trial registrationISRCTN registry, ISRCTN17754650. Registered on 03/08/2021. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN17754650 .
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.