TY - JOUR
T1 - Consensus statement on defining and measuring negative effects of Internet interventions
AU - Rozental, Alexander
AU - Andersson, Gerhard
AU - Boettcher, Johanna
AU - Ebert, David Daniel
AU - Cuijpers, Pim
AU - Knaevelsrud, Christine
AU - Ljótsson, Brjánn
AU - Kaldo, Viktor
AU - Titov, Nickolai
AU - Carlbring, Per
N1 - Copyright the Author(s) 2014. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.
PY - 2014
Y1 - 2014
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84904266250&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.invent.2014.02.001
DO - 10.1016/j.invent.2014.02.001
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:84904266250
SN - 2214-7829
VL - 1
SP - 12
EP - 19
JO - Internet Interventions
JF - Internet Interventions
IS - 1
ER -