Availability of Internet-Based Cognitive-Behavioral Therapies for Depression: A Systematic Review.

We examined the availability and components of internet-based cognitive-behavioral therapies (iCBTs) for depression tested in randomized-controlled trials (RCTs). The objectives of this literature review were to determine the extent to which research-validated iCBTs were available to the public, as well as to determine their therapeutic content. A literature review of RCTs for iCBTs was conducted on July 30, 2021. For each iCBT, interventions were rated by content and compared to commercially available smartphone apps. Our search yielded 80 studies using 41 unique iCBTs. Of these, only 6 (15%) were completely available to the public, more than half were not publicly available (46%), and the remaining 39% were available to the public with some restrictions (e.g., those based on the user's geographical location). When comparing iCBTs evaluated in RCTs to commercially available smartphone apps, we found that iCBTs were more likely to contain psychoeducation, cognitive restructuring, behavioral activation, problem solving, and interpersonal communication components. iCBTs from RCTs contain evidence-based content but few are available to the public. Extending beyond efficacy, attention should be paid to the dissemination of iCBTs.

'Excessive and Unreasonable': The Relation Between Clinical Insight and Clinical Correlates and Treatment Outcomes in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder Across the Life Course.

Individuals with mental disorders possess varying levels of clinical insight-the degree to which one understands that they are afflicted with a mental disorder and that their symptoms are manifestations of this psychopathology. Although clinical insight in OCD is thought to play an especially important role in determining various clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes, insight has not been sufficiently addressed developmentally, the importance of which this review will elucidate. Findings from this review suggest that clinical insight is typically associated with more complex cases and worse treatment outcomes across the life course, and also reveal nuances between pediatric and adult OCD cases with low insight. Implications of these findings, future research directions, and recommendations for the field are discussed.

Research Review: The internalizing paradox - youth anxiety and depression symptoms, psychotherapy outcomes, and implications for research and practice.

BACKGROUND: Youth anxiety and depression have long been combined within the empirically derived internalizing syndrome. The two conditions show substantial comorbidity, symptom co-occurrence, and overlap in treatment procedures, but paradoxically diverge in psychotherapy outcomes: strong, positive effects for anxiety and weak effects for depression. METHODS: Drawing on recent research, we examine candidate explanations for this paradox to help identify strategies for addressing it by improving outcomes for youth depression. RESULTS: Candidate explanations include that youth depression, compared with youth anxiety, has more varied comorbidities and more heterogeneous symptom combinations, has greater uncertainty regarding mediators and mechanisms of change, is treated with more complex and potentially confusing protocols, and has characteristics that may impede client engagement. Candidate strategies for shrinking the psychotherapy effectiveness gap include personalizing through transdiagnostic modular treatment, simplifying therapy by focusing on empirically supported principles of change, developing effective strategies for engaging family members as intervention allies, using shared decision-making to inform clinical decisions and boost client engagement, capitalizing on youth-friendly technological advances, and shortening and digitizing treatments to enhance their accessibility and appeal. CONCLUSIONS: Recent advances suggest explanations for the internalizing paradox, which in turn suggest strategies for shrinking the youth anxiety-depression psychotherapy outcome gap; these form an agenda for a promising new era of research.

Promoting Graduate Student Mental Health During COVID-19: Acceptability, Feasibility, and Perceived Utility of an Online Single-Session Intervention.

The COVID-19 outbreak has simultaneously increased the need for mental health services and decreased their availability. Brief online self-help interventions that can be completed in a single session could be especially helpful in improving access to care during the crisis. However, little is known about the uptake, acceptability, and perceived utility of these interventions outside of clinical trials in which participants are compensated. Here, we describe the development, deployment, acceptability ratings, and pre-post effects of a single-session intervention, the Common Elements Toolbox (COMET), adapted for the COVID-19 crisis to support graduate and professional students. Participants (n = 263), who were not compensated, were randomly assigned to two of three modules: behavioral activation, cognitive restructuring, and gratitude. Over 1 week, 263 individuals began and 189 individuals (72%) completed the intervention. Participants reported that the intervention modules were acceptable (93% endorsing), helpful (88%), engaging (86%), applicable to their lives (87%), and could help them manage COVID-related challenges (88%). Participants reported pre- to post-program improvements in secondary control (i.e., the belief that one can control their reactions to objective events; d av = 0.36, d z = 0.50, p < 0.001) and in the perceived negative impact of the COVID-19 crisis on their quality of life (d av = 0.22, d z = 0.25, p < 0.001). On average, differences in their perceived ability to handle lifestyle changes resulting from the pandemic were positive, but small and at the level of a non-significant trend (d av = 0.13, d z = 0.14, p = 0.066). Our results highlight the acceptability and utility of an online intervention for supporting individuals through the COVID-19 crisis.

Commonly Reported Problems and Coping Strategies During the COVID-19 Crisis: A Survey of Graduate and Professional Students.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 crisis has introduced a variety of stressors, while simultaneously decreasing the availability of strategies to cope with stress. In this context, it could be useful to understand issues that people find most concerning and ways in which they cope with stress. In this study, we explored these questions with a sample of graduate and professional students. METHOD: Using open-ended assessments, we asked participants (n = 305) to identify their biggest challenge or concern ("top problem"), their most effective way of handling stress ("effective strategy"), and their most common way of handling stress ("common strategy"). We applied thematic analysis and evaluated whether participants' strategies corresponded with evidence-based practices (EBPs). RESULTS: Participants frequently reported top problems relating to productivity (27% of sample), physical health (26%), and emotional health (14%). Distraction was the most frequently classified common strategy (43%), whereas behavioral activation was the most frequently identified effective strategy (50%). Participants who reported a common strategy classified as an EBP reported lower depressive and anxiety symptoms. In contrast, there was no evidence of an association between symptom levels and whether or not participants' effective strategy was an EBP. Participants who reported the same strategy as both their common and effective strategy (29%) reported lower depressive symptoms than those whose common and effective strategies were different. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight stressors that students are experiencing and ways they are coping during the COVID-19 crisis. We discuss how these findings can inform mental health promotion efforts and future research on coping with stressors.