Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2025
Investigating the Efficacy of the Web-Based Common Elements Toolbox (COMET) Single-Session Interventions in Improving UK University Student Well-Being: Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05718141 (An Online Wellness Intervention for University Students), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
An Online Wellness Intervention for University Students: Investigating the Efficacy of The Common Elements Toolbox in the UK
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The intervention effect of internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy on anxiety, depression, and stress in college students: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Leveraging machine learning to personalize depression treatment: A pre-registered study of 828 adults randomized to a digital single-session intervention or waitlist.Clinical psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2026Article
- Toolkits and Toolboxes on Cancer Care and Mental Health: A Scoping Review Following the PRSMA-ScR Guidelines.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMental health problems in university students are associated with many negative outcomes, yet there is a gap between need and timely access to help. Single-session interventions (SSIs) are designed to be scalable and accessible, delivering core evidence-based intervention components within a one-off encounter.
objectiveCOMET (Common Elements Toolbox) is an online self-help SSI that includes behavioral activation, cognitive restructuring, gratitude, and self-compassion. COMET has previously been evaluated in India, Kenya, and the United States with promising results. This study tests the acceptability, appropriateness, perceived utility, and efficacy of COMET among UK university students during the peripandemic period.
methodsWe conducted a randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of COMET compared with a control group, with 2- and 4-week follow-ups. Outcome variables were subjective well-being, depression severity, anxiety severity, positive affect, negative affect, and perceived stress. We also measured intervention satisfaction immediately after completion of COMET. All UK university students with access to the internet were eligible to participate and were informed of the study online. The data were analyzed using linear mixed models and reported in accordance with the CONSORT-EHEALTH (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials of Electronic and Mobile Health Applications and Online Telehealth) checklist.
resultsOf the 831 people screened, 468 participants were randomized to a condition, 407 completed the postintervention survey, 147 returned the 2-week follow-up survey, 118 returned the 4-week follow-up survey, and 89 returned both. Of the 239 randomized, 212 completed COMET. Significant between-group differences in favor of the COMET intervention were observed at 2-week follow-ups for subjective well-being (Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale; mean difference [MD] 1.39, 95% CI 0.19-2.61; P=.03), depression severity (9-item Patient Health Questionnaire; MD -1.31, 95% CI -2.51 to -0.12; P=.03), and perceived stress (4-item Perceived Stress Scale; MD -1.33, 95% CI -2.10 to -0.57; P<.001). Overall, participants were satisfied with COMET, with the majority endorsing the intervention and its modules as acceptable, appropriate, and exhibiting high utility. The self-compassion module was most often reported as the participants' favorite module and the behavioral activation module was their least favorite. Qualitative analysis revealed that participants found COMET generally accessible, but too long, and experienced immediate and long-term beneficial effects.
conclusionsThis study demonstrated high engagement with the COMET intervention, along with preliminary short-term efficacy. Almost all participants completed the intervention, but study attrition was high. Participant feedback indicated a high level of overall satisfaction with the intervention, with perceived accessibility, immediate benefits, and potential long-term impact being notable findings. These findings support the potential value of COMET as a mental health intervention and highlight important areas for further improvement.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT05718141; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05718141.
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.