ReviewCureus2024
Effectiveness of Web-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depression: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Review in Cureus, 2024. 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.
- The application of AI-driven digital phenotyping and interventions in neuropsychiatric disorders.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Evidence-based practices were more effective in managing mental health disorders when compared to traditional, non-evidence-based approaches. Web-based cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) interventions offer a wide variety of advantages among depressed patients as they offer a sense of anonymity, privacy, and accessibility. This systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aims to estimate the efficacy of several types of web-based interventions among patients with depression symptoms. This review was conducted according to the principles of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched the literature using five databases: PubMed, Medline, Ovid, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Scopus. Key terms for depression and web-based CBT included "Depression", "Cognitive behavioral therapy", "CBT", "Effectiveness", "Internet", and "Web-based". The included studies were published between 2019 and 2024 and assessed the risk of bias (ROB) using the ROB2 tool for RCTs. This search strategy yielded 2902 records, of which 1946 were duplicates and removed. The remaining 956 records underwent screening of their titles and abstracts, and 900 records were excluded. The full texts of the remaining 56 records were retrieved; 45 of them were excluded since 13 had the wrong study design, 10 had inappropriate outcomes, 12 had inappropriate populations, and 10 were out of the date range. All the included studies were 11 RCTs. Most studies assessed the efficacy of internet-based CBT (ICBT) or web-delivered CBT (wCBT). Control groups included the waitlist control (WLC) group and the treatment as usual (TAU) group, and one study included an active control group. Six studies compared the effects of guided or self-guided ICBT with control, three compared wCBT with control, one used internet self-guided intervention, and one employed an internet-based Functional Depression (iFD) program. Interventions were generally self-guided or guided by laypersons, nonspecialists, or automated systems. It can be concluded that despite the significance of most interventions favoring internet-based interventions compared to control groups, many limitations existed in the included studies, making it unclear whether the interventions would prove conclusive and reliable benefits. Therefore, more studies should be conducted on larger sample populations with prolonged duration.
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.