Trial reportJournal of behavioral addictions2025
Identifying internet addiction profiles and bridge connectors among Chinese college students and evaluating CBT vs. CBT+MBI interventions via a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Journal of behavioral addictions, 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.
- Mindfulness-based and mindfulness-informed interventions for internet use disorders in adolescents and young adults: A three-level random-effects meta-analysis.Journal of behavioral addictions · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- From loneliness to internet addiction in adolescents: disentangling the within-person mediating role of rumination via RI-CLPM.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- The relationship between mindfulness, self-control, and short video addiction among medical students.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: The Interaction of Person-Affect-Cognition-Execution (I-PACE) model offers a framework for understanding the interplay between cognitive, affective, and behavioral factors in internet addiction (IA). Our study aims to explore the heterogeneity of IA, identify bridge connectors, and compare the efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy combined with mindfulness-based intervention (CBT+MBI) versus CBT alone in reducing IA levels among Chinese college students. Methods: In study 1, 1,030 Chinese college students completed assessments of IA, automatic thoughts, self-control, and anxiety. Latent profile analysis (LPA) was employed to identify distinct symptom profiles of IA across individuals. Network analysis (NA) identified bridge connectors for targeted intervention. In study 2, 36 participants randomly selected from the high IA and low IA groups of study 1 were randomly assigned to CBT+MBI, CBT alone, or a control group. The CBT+MBI group received an 8-week dual-modality intervention and the CBT alone received an 8-week CBT intervention, both designed to target the bridge connectors identified via NA in Study 1, while the control group only completed basic questionnaires. Results: In study 1, LPA identified four subgroups: regular, at-risk, low IA, and high IA groups. NA pinpointed automatic thoughts and anxiety as bridge connectors. In study 2, targeted interventions significantly reduced college students' levels of IA. CBT+MBI resulted in greater and more sustained improvements compared to CBT alone, with effects maintained for six-month post-intervention. Conclusions: Our study not only reinforces the I-PACE model but also provides actionable strategies for designing evidence-based, multidimensional interventions to reduce addictive behaviors among college students.
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.