ObjectiveInternet-based cognitive behavior therapy (ICBT) may provide an accessible alternative to face-to-face treatment, but the evidence base in adolescents is limited. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to comprehensively assess the efficacy of ICBT in addressing depression among adolescents.MethodsFour electronic databases were searched on June 8, 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of ICBT for depression in adolescents were included. The quality of the studies was assessed using the risk of bias tool recommended by the Cochrane Handbook. Furthermore, the GRADE approach was employed to gauge the certainty of the obtained evidence. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4, and Egger's test was implemented through Stata for assessment of potential publication bias.ResultsA total of 18 RCTs involving 1683 patients were included. In comparison to control groups like attention control, waiting list, and treatment as usual, our meta-analysis findings elucidate a significant reduction in depression scores (SMD = −0.42, 95 % CI: [−0.74, −0.11], p .05).ConclusionResults provide evidence of the efficacy of ICBT to reduce depressive and anxiety symptoms in adolescents. These research findings are of vital significance for the establishment of evidence-based treatment guidelines in the digital era.Trial registrationPROSPERO registration: CRD42021277562

Objective: Internet-based cognitive behavior therapy (ICBT) may provide an accessible alternative to face-to-face treatment, but the evidence base in adolescents is limited. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to comprehensively assess the efficacy of ICBT in addressing depression among adolescents. Methods: Four electronic databases were searched on June 8, 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of ICBT for depression in adolescents were included. The quality of the studies was assessed using the risk of bias tool recommended by the Cochrane Handbook. Furthermore, the GRADE approach was employed to gauge the certainty of the obtained evidence. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4, and Egger's test was implemented through Stata for assessment of potential publication bias. Results: A total of 18 RCTs involving 1683 patients were included. In comparison to control groups like attention control, waiting list, and treatment as usual, our meta-analysis findings elucidate a significant reduction in depression scores (SMD = -0.42, 95 % CI: [-0.74, -0.11], p .05). Conclusion: Results provide evidence of the efficacy of ICBT to reduce depressive and anxiety symptoms in adolescents. These research findings are of vital significance for the establishment of evidence-based treatment guidelines in the digital era. Trial registration: PROSPERO registration: CRD42021277562.

Objectives: This study aimed to conduct a systematic review of cost-utility studies of internet-based and face-to-face cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for depression from childhood to adulthood and to examine their reporting and methodological quality. Methods: A structured search for cost-utility studies concerning CBT for depression was performed in 7 comprehensive databases from their inception to July 2020. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, abstracted data, and assessed quality using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards and Quality of Health Economic Studies checklists. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) across all studies. To make a relevant comparison of the ICERs across the identified studies, cost data were inflated to the year 2020 and converted into US dollars. Results: Thirty-eight studies were included in this review, of which 26 studies (68%) were deemed of high methodological quality and 12 studies (32%) of fair quality. Despite differences in study designs and settings, the conclusions of most included studies for adult depression were general agreement; they showed that face-to-face CBT monotherapy or combination therapy compared with antidepressants and usual care for adult depression were cost-effective from the societal, health system, or payer perspective (ICER $241 212.4/quality-adjusted life-year [QALY] to $33 032.47/QALY, time horizon 12-60 months). Internet-based CBT regardless of guided or unguided also has a significant cost-effectiveness advantage (ICER $37 717.52/QALY to $73 841.34/QALY, time horizon 3-36 months). In addition, CBT was cost-effective in preventing depression (ICER $23 932.07/QALY to $26 092.02/QALY, time horizon 9-60 months). Nevertheless, the evidence for the cost-effectiveness of CBT for children and adolescents was still ambiguous. Conclusions: Fair or high-quality evidence showed that CBT monotherapy or combination therapy for adult depression was cost-effective; whether CBT-related therapy was cost-effective for children and adolescents depression remains inconclusive.

This review compared the efficacy and acceptability of different delivery formats for cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) in insomnia. We searched five databases for randomized clinical trials that compared one CBT-I delivery format against another format or control conditions for insomnia in adults. We used pairwise meta-analyses and frequentist network meta-analyses with the random-effects model to synthesize data. A total of 61 unique trials including 11,571 participants compared six CBT-I delivery formats with four control conditions. At post-intervention, with low to high certainty evidence, individual, group, guided self-help, digital assisted, and unguided self-help CBT-I could significantly increase sleep efficiency and total sleep time (TST) and reduce sleep onset latency (SOL), wake after sleep onset (WASO), and insomnia severity compared with treatment as usual (MD range for sleep efficiency: 7.81%-12.45%; MD range for TST: 16.14-33.96 min; MD range for SOL:-22.42 to-13.81 min; MD range for WASO:-40.84 to-19.48 min; MD range for insomnia severity:-6.40 to-3.93) and waitlist (MD range for sleep efficiency: 7.68%-12.32%; MD range for TST: 12.67-30.49 min; MD range for SOL:-19.07 to-10.46 min; MD range for WASO:-47.10 to-19.15 min; MD range for insomnia severity:-7.59 to-5.07). The effects of different CBT-I formats per-sisted at short-term follow-up (4 wk-6 mo). Individual, group, and digital assisted CBT-I delivery formats would be the more appropriate choices for insomnia in adults, based on post-intervention and short-term effects. Further trials are needed to investigate the long-term effects of different CBT-I formats. (c) 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

BACKGROUND: Depression and anxiety disorders are common and treatable with cognitive behavior therapy (CBT), but access to this therapy is limited. OBJECTIVE: Review evidence that computerized CBT for the anxiety and depressive disorders is acceptable to patients and effective in the short and longer term. METHOD: Systematic reviews and data bases were searched for randomized controlled trials of computerized cognitive behavior therapy versus a treatment or control condition in people who met diagnostic criteria for major depression, panic disorder, social phobia or generalized anxiety disorder. Number randomized, superiority of treatment versus control (Hedges g) on primary outcome measure, risk of bias, length of follow up, patient adherence and satisfaction were extracted. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: 22 studies of comparisons with a control group were identified. The mean effect size superiority was 0.88 (NNT 2.13), and the benefit was evident across all four disorders. Improvement from computerized CBT was maintained for a median of 26 weeks follow-up. Acceptability, as indicated by adherence and satisfaction, was good. Research probity was good and bias risk low. Effect sizes were non-significantly higher in comparisons with waitlist than with active treatment control conditions. Five studies comparing computerized CBT with traditional face-to-face CBT were identified, and both modes of treatment appeared equally beneficial. CONCLUSIONS: Computerized CBT for anxiety and depressive disorders, especially via the internet, has the capacity to provide effective acceptable and practical health care for those who might otherwise remain untreated.

The rapid advances and adoption of smartphone technology presents a novel opportunity for delivering mental health interventions on a population scale. Despite multi-sector investment along with wide-scale advertising and availability to the general population, the evidence supporting the use of smartphone apps in the treatment of depression has not been empirically evaluated. Thus, we conducted the first meta-analysis of smartphone apps for depressive symptoms. An electronic database search in May 2017 identified 18 eligible randomized controlled trials of 22 smartphone apps, with outcome data from 3,414 participants. Depressive symptoms were reduced significantly more from smartphone apps than control conditions (g=0.38, 95% CI: 0.24-0.52, p<0.001), with no evidence of publication bias. Smartphone interventions had a moderate positive effect in comparison to inactive controls (g=0.56, 95% CI: 0.38-0.74), but only a small effect in comparison to active control conditions (g=0.22, 95% CI: 0.10-0.33). Effects from smartphone-only interventions were greater than from interventions which incorporated other human/computerized aspects along the smartphone component, although the difference was not statistically significant. The studies of cognitive training apps had a significantly smaller effect size on depression outcomes (p=0.004) than those of apps focusing on mental health. The use of mood monitoring softwares, or interventions based on cognitive behavioral therapy, or apps incorporating aspects of mindfulness training, did not affect significantly study effect sizes. Overall, these results indicate that smartphone devices are a promising self-management tool for depression. Future research should aim to distil which aspects of these technologies produce beneficial effects, and for which populations.