ArticlePLOS mental health2025
Feasibility, efficacy, and perceptions of an online writing intervention in patients with depressive disorders: A randomized, multi-methods pilot study.
Article in PLOS mental health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06699719 (Feasibility, Efficacy, and Perceptions of an Online Writing Intervention in Patients With Major Depressive Disorder), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Feasibility, Efficacy, and Perceptions of an Online Writing Intervention in Patients With Major Depressive Disorder: A Multi-methods Study
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Barriers to accessing treatment for Depressive Disorders highlight a need for scalable interventions. Expressive writing (EW), which involves daily writing about a personal issue, has been shown to alleviate depressive symptoms in various samples. Its simple format makes it amenable to online administration. We conducted a multi-methods study to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, and perceived utility of online EW in patients with Depressive Disorders. We recruited 53 patients diagnosed with a Depressive Disorder from a psychiatry hospital. Half were randomized to complete four 20-minute sessions of EW online and the other half were randomized as controls. All participants completed measures before and after the intervention, and at a one-month follow up. Our primary outcome for feasibility was the number of participants completing at least three sessions of EW, and for efficacy, the primary outcome was depressive symptom severity. Secondary outcomes were anxiety symptom severity, functional impairment, and perceived personal problem complexity. Mixed effect models assessed the impact of condition (EW or control), time, and their interaction on each outcome. Qualitative interviews with 11 participants assigned to EW probed into their experiences, which were subject to reflexive thematic analysis. Most EW participants (73%) completed at least three EW sessions, but only 23% wrote for 20 minutes. There was no evidence that condition interacted with time to impact depressive symptoms (F = 0.10, p = .904), anxiety symptoms (F = 0.17, p = .847), functional impairment (F = 1.03, p = .363), or perceived problem complexity (F = 0.94, p = .394). In qualitative interviews, some participants reported EW allowed them to offload or process negative emotions and thoughts, whereas others reported it to be unhelpful. EW was feasible to administer online to patients with Depressive Disorders, with some reported benefits for emotional and cognitive processing. However, EW was not associated with improvements in symptoms and may not be an effective online intervention for Depressive Disorders in its current state. Providing more guidance, with some clinical oversight or support, may be a promising approach to modifying the intervention in future work. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06699719.
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.