Trial reportBMJ mental health2026
Therapist-guided and self-guided internet-based behavioural activation versus treatment as usual for adolescents with depression: randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation.
Trial report in BMJ mental health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdolescent depression is a major public health concern with limited access to effective treatments. Behavioural activation (BA) is a suitable intervention for digital delivery, but definitive adolescent trials are scarce.
objectiveTo evaluate whether therapist-guided and self-guided internet-based BA (I-BA) are more efficacious and cost-effective than treatment as usual (TAU) for adolescents with mild to moderate major depressive disorder (MDD).
methodsSingle-blinded, parallel-group randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation. A total of 219 adolescents (13-17 years) with mild-moderate MDD were randomised (1:1:1) to 10 weeks of therapist-guided I-BA, self-guided I-BA or TAU. Both I-BA interventions included adolescent and parent modules. PRIMARY OUTCOME: change in depression severity (Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised, CDRS-R, range 17-113) from baseline to 3-month follow-up (primary endpoint), assessed by blinded evaluators. Analyses included all randomised participants, with statisticians blinded to allocation. A health economic evaluation was performed at the primary endpoint.
findingsBaseline CDRS-R indicated clinically significant depression (mean 57.1, threshold ≥40). Retention at the primary endpoint was 82.6%. Mean reductions were 17.0 (therapist-guided I-BA), 16.0 (self-guided I-BA) and 11.6 (TAU), bringing both I-BA groups below the clinical cut-off. Therapist-guided I-BA showed greater reductions than TAU (estimated mean difference -4.68; 95% CI -0.05 to -9.30; p=0.048,
conclusionsTherapist-guided I-BA reduced depressive symptoms at lower cost than TAU, but clinical importance and robustness are uncertain. Self-guided I-BA showed no clear superiority but was cost-efficient. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Therapist-guided I-BA may increase access to evidence-based care for adolescents with MDD, though findings require cautious interpretation. Self-guided I-BA may be useful where therapist access is limited, but more research is needed.
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.