Michelle G Newman1, Nicholas C Jacobson1,2, Gavin N Rackoff1, Megan Jones Bell3,4, C Barr Taylor4,5. 1. Department of Psychology, the Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA. 2. Department of Biomedical Data Science and Psychiatry, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA. 3. Headspace, Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA. 4. Department of Psychiatry, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. 5. Center for m2Health, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Abstract
AbstractIntroduction: Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is prevalent among college students. Smartphone-based interventions may be a low-cost treatment method. Method: College students with self-reported GAD were randomized to receive smartphone-based guided self-help (n = 50), or no treatment (n = 50). Post-treatment and six-month follow-up outcomes included the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales-Short Form Stress Subscale (DASS Stress), the Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ-11), and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-Trait (STAI-T), as well as diagnostic status assessed by the GAD-Questionnaire, 4th edition. Results: From pre- to post-treatment, participants who received guided self-help (vs. no treatment) experienced significantly greater reductions on the DASS Stress (d = -0.408) and a greater probability of remission from GAD (d = -0.445). There was no significant between-group difference in change on the PSWQ-11 (d = -0.208) or STAI-T (d = -0.114). From post to six-month follow-up there was no significant loss of gains on DASS Stress scores (d = -0.141) and of those who had remitted, 78.6% remained remitted. Yet rates of remitted participants no longer differed significantly between conditions at follow-up (d = -0.229). Conclusion: Smartphone-based interventions may be efficacious in treating some aspects of GAD. Methods for improving symptom reduction and long-term outcome are discussed.
AbstractIntroduction: Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is prevalent among college students. Smartphone-based interventions may be a low-cost treatment method. Method: College students with self-reported GAD were randomized to receive smartphone-based guided self-help (n = 50), or no treatment (n = 50). Post-treatment and six-month follow-up outcomes included the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales-Short Form Stress Subscale (DASS Stress), the Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ-11), and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-Trait (STAI-T), as well as diagnostic status assessed by the GAD-Questionnaire, 4th edition. Results: From pre- to post-treatment, participants who received guided self-help (vs. no treatment) experienced significantly greater reductions on the DASS Stress (d = -0.408) and a greater probability of remission from GAD (d = -0.445). There was no significant between-group difference in change on the PSWQ-11 (d = -0.208) or STAI-T (d = -0.114). From post to six-month follow-up there was no significant loss of gains on DASS Stress scores (d = -0.141) and of those who had remitted, 78.6% remained remitted. Yet rates of remitted participants no longer differed significantly between conditions at follow-up (d = -0.229). Conclusion: Smartphone-based interventions may be efficacious in treating some aspects of GAD. Methods for improving symptom reduction and long-term outcome are discussed.
Entities:
Keywords:
cognitive-behavioral therapy; generalized anxiety disorder; mobile intervention
Authors: Gerhard Andersson; Björn Paxling; Pie Roch-Norlund; Gunnar Östman; Anna Norgren; Jonas Almlöv; Lisa Georén; Elisabeth Breitholtz; Mats Dahlin; Pim Cuijpers; Per Carlbring; Farrell Silverberg Journal: Psychother Psychosom Date: 2012-09-06 Impact factor: 17.659
Authors: Martina Nitsch; Christina N Dimopoulos; Edith Flaschberger; Kristina Saffran; Jenna F Kruger; Lindsay Garlock; Denise E Wilfley; Craig B Taylor; Megan Jones Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2016-01-11 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Ellen E Fitzsimmons-Craft; C Barr Taylor; Michelle G Newman; Nur Hani Zainal; Elsa E Rojas-Ashe; Sarah Ketchen Lipson; Marie-Laure Firebaugh; Peter Ceglarek; Naira Topooco; Nicholas C Jacobson; Andrea K Graham; Hyungjin Myra Kim; Daniel Eisenberg; Denise E Wilfley Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2021-02-11 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Emily G Lattie; Katherine A Cohen; Emily Hersch; Kofoworola D A Williams; Kaylee Payne Kruzan; Carolyn MacIver; Joseph Hermes; Karen Maddi; Mary Kwasny; David C Mohr Journal: Internet Interv Date: 2021-12-24
Authors: Emily E Bernstein; Hilary Weingarden; Emma C Wolfe; Margaret D Hall; Ivar Snorrason; Sabine Wilhelm Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2022-04-08 Impact factor: 7.076
Authors: Kate Bartolotta; Sarah E Broner; Colleen S Conley; Elizabeth B Raposa; Maya Hareli; Nicola Forbes; Kirsten M Christensen; Mark Assink Journal: JMIR Ment Health Date: 2022-07-29