% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{KambeitzIlankovic:912526,
      author       = {Kambeitz-Ilankovic, Lana and Rzayeva, Uma and Völkel,
                      Laura and Wenzel, Julian and Weiske, Johanna and Jessen,
                      Frank and Reininghaus, Ulrich and Uhlhaas, Peter J. and
                      Alvarez-Jimenez, Mario and Kambeitz, Joseph},
      title        = {{A} systematic review of digital and face-to-face cognitive
                      behavioral therapy for depression},
      journal      = {npj digital medicine},
      volume       = {5},
      number       = {1},
      issn         = {2398-6352},
      address      = {[Basingstoke]},
      publisher    = {Macmillan Publishers Limited},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2022-05699},
      pages        = {144},
      year         = {2022},
      abstract     = {Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) represents one of the
                      major treatment options for depressive disorders besides
                      pharmacological interventions. While newly developed digital
                      CBT approaches hold important advantages due to higher
                      accessibility, their relative effectiveness compared to
                      traditional CBT remains unclear. We conducted a systematic
                      literature search to identify all studies that conducted a
                      CBT-based intervention (face-to-face or digital) in patients
                      with major depression. Random-effects meta-analytic models
                      of the standardized mean change using raw score
                      standardization (SMCR) were computed. In 106 studies
                      including n = 11854 patients face-to-face CBT shows
                      superior clinical effectiveness compared to digital CBT when
                      investigating depressive symptoms (p < 0.001,
                      face-to-face CBT: SMCR = 1.97, $95\%-CI:$ 1.74–2.13,
                      digital CBT: SMCR = 1.20, $95\%-CI:$ 1.08–1.32) and
                      adherence (p = 0.014, face-to-face CBT: $82.4\%,$
                      digital CBT: $72.9\%).$ However, after accounting for
                      differences between face-to-face and digital CBT studies,
                      both approaches indicate similar effectiveness. Important
                      variables with significant moderation effects include
                      duration of the intervention, baseline severity, adherence
                      and the level of human guidance in digital CBT
                      interventions. After accounting for potential confounders
                      our analysis indicates comparable effectiveness of
                      face-to-face and digital CBT approaches. These findings
                      underline the importance of moderators of clinical effects
                      and provide a basis for the future personalization of CBT
                      treatment in depression.Subject terms: Depression,
                      Randomized controlled trials},
      cin          = {INM-3},
      ddc          = {610},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)INM-3-20090406},
      pnm          = {5251 - Multilevel Brain Organization and Variability
                      (POF4-525)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5251},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      pubmed       = {36109583},
      UT           = {WOS:000854756700001},
      doi          = {10.1038/s41746-022-00677-8},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/912526},
}