| 1. |
- Andersson, Gerhard, 1966-, et al.
(författare)
-
Advantages and limitations of Internet-based interventions for common mental disorders
- 2014
-
Ingår i: World Psychiatry. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 1723-8617 .- 2051-5545. ; 13:1, s. 4-11
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Several Internet interventions have been developed and tested for common mental disorders, and the evidence to date shows that these treatments often result in similar outcomes as in face-to-face psychotherapy and that they are cost-effective. In this paper, we first review the pros and cons of how participants in Internet treatment trials have been recruited. We then comment on the assessment procedures often involved in Internet interventions and conclude that, while online questionnaires yield robust results, diagnoses cannot be determined without any contact with the patient. We then review the role of the therapist and conclude that, although treatments including guidance seem to lead to better outcomes than unguided treatments, this guidance can be mainly practical and supportive rather than explicitly therapeutic in orientation. Then we briefly describe the advantages and disadvantages of treatments for mood and anxiety disorders and comment on ways to handle comorbidity often associated with these disorders. Finally we discuss challenges when disseminating Internet interventions. In conclusion, there is now a large body of evidence suggesting that Internet interventions work. Several research questions remain open, including how Internet interventions can be blended with traditional forms of care.
|
|
| 2. |
- Carlbring, Per, et al.
(författare)
-
Consensus statement on defining and measuring negative effects of Internet interventions
- 2014
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Internet interventions have great potential for alleviating emotional distress, promoting mental health, and enhancing well-being. Numerous clinical trials have demonstrated their effectiveness for a number of psychiatric conditions, and interventions delivered via the Internet will likely become a common alternative to face-to-face treatment. Meanwhile, research has paid little attention to the negative effects associated with treatment, warranting further investigation of the possibility that some patients might deteriorate or encounter adverse events despite receiving best available care. Evidence from research of face-to-face treatment suggests that negative effects afflict 5-10% of all patients undergoing treatment in terms of deterioration.Objective: There is currently a lack of consensus on how to define and measure negative effects in psychotherapy research in general, leaving researchers without practical guidelines for monitoring and reporting negative effects in clinical trials. The current study therefore sought out to provide recommendations that could promote the study of negative effects in Internet interventions with the aim of increasing the knowledge of its occurrence and characteristics.Methods: Ten experts in the field of Internet interventions were invited to participate and share their perspective on how to explore negative effects, using the Delphi technique to facilitate a dialogue and reach an agreement. The authors discuss the importance of conducting research on negative effects in order to further the understanding of its incidence and different features.Results: Suggestions on how to classify and measure negative effects in Internet interventions are proposed, involving methods from both quantitative and qualitative research. Potential mechanisms underlying negative effects are also discussed, differentiating common factors shared with face-to-face treatments from those unique to treatments delivered via the Internet.Conclusions: We conclude that negative effects are to be expected and need to be acknowledged to a greater extent, advising researchers to systematically probe for negative effects whenever conducting clinical trials involving Internet interventions, as well as to share their findings in scientific journals.
|
|
| 3. |
- Rozental, Alexander, et al.
(författare)
-
Consensus statement on defining and measuring negative effects of Internet interventions
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Internet Interventions. - : Elsevier BV. - 2214-7829. ; 1:1, s. 12-19
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Internet interventions have great potential for alleviating emotional distress, promoting mental health, and enhancing well-being. Numerous clinical trials have demonstrated their efficacy for a number of psychiatric conditions, and interventions delivered via the Internet will likely become a common alternative to face-to-face treatment. Meanwhile, research has paid little attention to the negative effects associated with treatment, warranting further investigation of the possibility that some patients might deteriorate or encounter adverse events despite receiving best available care. Evidence from research of face-to-face treatment suggests that negative effects afflict 5–10% of all patients undergoing treatment in terms of deterioration. However, there is currently a lack of consensus on how to define and measure negative effects in psychotherapy research in general, leaving researchers without practical guidelines for monitoring and reporting negative effects in clinical trials. The current paper therefore seeks to provide recommendations that could promote the study of negative effects in Internet interventions with the aim of increasing the knowledge of its occurrence and characteristics. Ten leading experts in the field of Internet interventions were invited to participate and share their perspective on how to explore negative effects, using the Delphi technique to facilitate a dialog and reach an agreement. The authors discuss the importance of conducting research on negative effects in order to further the understanding of its incidence and different features. Suggestions on how to classify and measure negative effects in Internet interventions are proposed, involving methods from both quantitative and qualitative research. Potential mechanisms underlying negative effects are also discussed, differentiating common factors shared with face-to-face treatments from those unique to treatments delivered via the Internet. The authors conclude that negative effects are to be expected and need to be acknowledged to a greater extent, advising researchers to systematically probe for negative effects whenever conducting clinical trials involving Internet interventions, as well as to share their findings in scientific journals.
|
|
| 4. |
- Rozental, Alexander, et al.
(författare)
-
Consensus statement on defining and measuring negative effects of Internet interventions
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Oral Abstracts from the 7th Scientific Meeting of the International Society for Research on Internet Interventions. ; , s. 39-39
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Purpose: Internet interventions provide a potential for promoting mental health and alleviating emotional distress. A large number of clinical trials have demonstrated their efficacy for several psychiatric conditions, and Internet interventions will likely become a common and valuable alternative within the regular health care. In the meantime, research has paid little attention to the possibility that some treatments might be associated with different types of negative effects. Evidence from face-to-face treatments suggests that 5-10% of all patients deteriorate despite receiving best available care. In addition, other forms of negative effects may exist as well, e.g., social stigmatization, interpersonal difficulties, and decreased self-esteem. However, a lack of agreement on how to define and measure negative effects has left researchers without practical guidelines for monitoring and reporting deterioration and adverse events in clinical trials, warranting a consensus for conducting research on negative effects.Method: The objective of the current paper is to provide recommendations that could promote the study of negative effects in Internet interventions. Ten leading experts in the field of Internet interventions were invited to participate and share their perspective on how to explore negative effects, using the Delphi technique to facilitate a dialogue and reach an agreement.Results: The importance of conducting further research on negative effects is discussed, and suggestions on how to classify and measure negative effects are provided, involving methods from quantitative and qualitative research. Potential mechanisms underlying negative effects are also presented, differentiating factors shared with face-to-face treatments from those unique to treatments delivered via the Internet.Conclusion: Negative effects should be expected and need to be recognized to a greater extent, and researchers are advised to systematically probe for negative effects whenever conducting clinical trials involving Internet interventions, as well as to share their findings in scientific journals.
|
|
