Twelve-month outcomes and comparative costs of internet-delivered psychodynamic therapy versus cognitive-behavioral therapy for adolescent depression: a randomized controlled trial
Rattachement africain : se, kr, pt, gb, no. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Introduction: Adolescent depression poses a major public health concern with substantial clinical and societal implications. Both internet-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy (ICBT) and internet-delivered psychodynamic therapy (IPDT) have shown efficacy, but questions remain regarding long-term efficacy and cost-effectiveness. The present study presents a 12-month follow-up and cost-comparison from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICBT and IPDT for adolescent depression. Methods: Participants were 272 adolescents aged 15-19 with a primary diagnosis of major depressive disorder. The primary outcome was depressive symptoms measured with the QIDS-A17-SR while the secondary outcome was anxiety symptoms measured with the GAD-7. Costs were assessed both by comparing costs of treatment and healthcare use 12-month post-treatment using the TIC-P. Results: Results were stable at the 12-month follow up compared to treatment endpoint, for both depressive and anxiety symptoms. There were no significant group differences at the 12-month follow-up. There were no differences in treatment costs or in costs for healthcare use one-year post-treatment. Discussion: This study suggests that treatment gains from IPDT and ICBT for adolescent depression remain stable during a 12-month follow-up period, with no differences between the treatments one-year post-treatment. Furthermore, it suggests comparable costs for the treatments. Interpretation of health-care use data was restricted due to the COVID-19 pandemic taking place during the follow-up period. This adds to the literature suggesting that ICBT and IPDT can be seen as viable alternatives for treating adolescent depression. More research into the long-term effects and cost-effectiveness is needed.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Twelve-month outcomes and comparative costs of internet-delivered psychodynamic therapy versus cognitive-behavioral therapy for adolescent depression: a randomized controlled trial
- Date Crossref
- 20/04/2026
- Éditeur
- Frontiers Media SA
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Où se fait cette recherche
-
Stockholm University Department of Psychology pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Uppsala University Department of Psychology pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Korea University pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Linköping University Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Universidade Lusófona pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Anna Freud Centre pays non établi dans la noticeOrganisation à but non lucratif
-
University College London pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
University of Oslo Department of Psychology pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Lund University Department of Psychology pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Oslo University Hospital pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
The Erica Foundation pays non établi dans la noticeOrganisation à but non lucratif
-
School of Psychology pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
Department of Psychology — Stockholm University, Department of Psychology — Uppsala University et Korea University, avec 9 autres affiliations.
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.