Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40552199›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025

The association between patient engagement and treatment outcome in guided internet-delivered CBT for anxiety and depression.

Karin Hammerfald, Henrik Haaland Jahren, Ole André Solbakken

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Karin HammerfaldDepartment of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Henrik Haaland JahrenBraive AS, Oslo, Norway.
Ole André SolbakkenDepartment of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The present evaluation aimed to explore patterns in routinely collected clinical data to better understand how user engagement may be associated with symptom change during guided iCBT treatment for depression and anxiety in a routine care setting. As part of ongoing quality assurance efforts, we examined whether specific engagement indicators were related to treatment outcomes. These analyses were motivated by previous findings in the literature suggesting that higher engagement may be linked to greater symptom improvement. Methods: Anonymous data of 514 patients who signed up for an internet-delivered, guided treatment program for depression or anxiety, were obtained for estimating patterns of change and the impact of predictors of change using Multilevel Modeling. Initial assessment after sign-up included various questionnaires and demographic information. Log data from user interactions with the guided iCBT programs was used to assess patient and clinician engagement. Clinical outcomes included symptoms of depression (Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ-9) and anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, GAD-7). Results: Patients started a mean of 7.14 modules, completed 64.7% of assigned modules and 62.8% of assigned activities. Patients with clinical depression or anxiety levels experienced significant changes between initial assessment and first outcome assessment as well as significant symptom reduction during treatment. Initial symptom levels and engagement persistence predicted treatment outcomes. Conclusions: The present study replicates previous findings suggesting that safeguarding exposure to and engagement with content is significantly associated with outcome.

Indexed as

anxietydepressioniCBTpredictors of changeroutine caresymptom changeuser engagement

Identifiers

PMID40552199
PMCPMC12184097

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.