Major Depressive DisorderAMHINCT04120285
Appalachian Mind Health Initiative
A study testing remote internet-based cognitive behavior therapy (eCBT) in people with Major Depressive Disorder, run by University of South Florida at 7 sites in United States.
Trial summary
We propose to carry out a treatment experiment in which we evaluate the extent to which randomizing primary care clinicians have access to remote internet-based Cognitive Behavior Therapy (eCBT) in rural West Virginia (WV) and Kentucky (KY) will help improve treatment of patients with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Major Depressive Disorder
- What is being tested?
- remote internet-based cognitive behavior therapy (eCBT)
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 1,280 participants
- Where
- 7 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- 9 Jan 2021to 30 Jan 2026
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- seeking MDD treatment for the first time in the past 6 months (i.e., the beginning of a first or new course of treatment),
- appropriate for outpatient treatment,
- literate in English,
- has access to a smart phone, home computer or willing to travel to access a computer
- without hearing or vision or cognitive impairment that would interfere with research data collection
- without history of either bipolar disorder or non-affective psychosis.
Who cannot join
None listed.
Trial locations and contacts
7 sites in 1 country.
7 sites in 1 country
United States7 sites
Upper Kanawha Clinic
Cedar Grove, West Virginia, 25039
Minnie Hamilton Health Systems
Glenville, West Virginia, 26351
Minnie Hamilton Health Systems
Grantsville, West Virginia, 26147
Harpers Ferry Family Medicine
Harpers Ferry, West Virginia, 25425
University of Lousiville Health
Louisville, Kentucky, 40202
WVU Medicine
Morgantown, West Virginia, 26505
Wayne Medical Clinic
Wayne, West Virginia, 25570
About this study
Official title: Remote Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Major Depression (RTD) in Primary Care
We propose to carry out a treatment experiment in which we evaluate the extent to which randomizing primary care clinicians have access to remote internet-based Cognitive Behavior Therapy (eCBT) in rural West Virginia (WV) and Kentucky (KY) will help improve treatment of patients with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). WV and KY are two of the most rural states in America and mental health treatment resources are low; especially in rural parts of the state.
Read the detailed description
The investigators propose a pragmatic trial of the comparative effectiveness of two levels of remote internet-based cognitive behavior therapy (eCBT) to treat major depressive disorder (MDD) with and without comorbidities. The investigators intend to recruit 3,360 patients receiving primary care MDD treatment throughout West Virginia (WV) and Kentucky (KY). The investigators two main aims will be to use experimental methods to evaluate the aggregate effects of these interventions on patient-centered outcomes and to investigate predictors of heterogeneity of treatment effects. MDD treatment in WV \& KY is far from optimal, with rural patients especially underserved. WV is the 2nd most rural state in the US, has the 2nd lowest per capita income and has the highest proportion of residents covered by Medicaid. Need for services is high, as indicated by WV having the highest suicide rate of any state east of the Mississippi River and the highest opioid death rate in the country. Yet WV ranks only 42nd in overall mental health care. The vast majority of MDD treatment in rural areas is in primary care and consists largely of antidepressant medication (ADM). Electronic medical records (EMRs) show that 88% of primary care MDD patients in WV's FQHCs are treated exclusively with ADM and that the other 12% are treated with ADM plus psychotherapy. The limited number of patients who can access psychotherapy usually must go on a waiting list (often 3+ months) and travel long distances for treatment once available. Access to telephone or videoconference psychotherapy is limited. Yet 75% of depressed primary care patients express a desire for psychotherapy either alone (40%) or in combination with ADM (35%).
This mismatch between treatment availability and preference is important because MDD remission increases substantially when patients are treated with their preferred type. There is thus good reason to believe that providing access to eCBT will improve MDD treatment outcomes in our trial. Indeed, prior controlled trials show that both types of eCBT the investigators will randomize yield significantly better outcomes than waiting list controls. Controlled trials also show that guided eCBT yields equivalent outcomes to telephone and face-to-face CBT, but at much lower cost. Other controlled trials show that combined CBT-ADM yield significantly better outcomes than either CBT-alone or ADM-alone, although these comparisons have been made only for face-to-face CBT. These results provide good reason to believe that offering eCBT in rural FQHCs throughout WV and KY could improve MDD outcomes. Existing research on eCBT in rural areas, while promising, has been limited, making the research the investigators propose important to provide actionable information for patients and other stakeholders. Results intend to inform decisions about whether to offer/use eCBT, with what level of guidance, and for whom.
Unguided eCBT is web-based CBT completed with computerized feedback but no clinician involvement after an initial orientation meeting. Guided eCBT is web-based CBT completed with a remote eCoach who communicates with the patient via email, text, and telephone. eCoaches also provide elements of remote collaborative care case management, such as encouraging ADM adherence, monitoring ADM side effects and treatment response, coordinating with the primary care physician (PCP), and facilitating specialty referral. Collaborative care is known to be highly effective in promoting MDD symptomatic remission. In addition, a study in Arkansas FQHCs found that remote collaborative care case management out-performed on-site case management in rural clinics too small to justify having a dedicated mental health case manager on staff. However, remote collaborative care case management often involves delivering telephone CBT. A major constraint on expanding the collaborative care model for primary care MDD treatment, which has been used in urban but not rural WV clinics, is lack of case managers who can deliver telephone CBT. Thus, expanding eCBT in rural WV would allow offering a strongly evidence-based form of patients' preferred treatment (psychotherapy) and a form of a well-validated rural MDD care model (collaborative care case management with guided eCBT) that cannot be offered currently because of limited clinical resources.
Given its documented efficacy and rapid spread, the investigators expect eCBT to become widely available in rural WV as a result of our trial. But two real-life decisional dilemmas will arise in that context. Primary care clinicians will be faced with the decision about when to recommend eCBT and at what level of intensity. Patients will be faced with the decision of whether to accept guided or unguided eCBT as part of their treatment plan. These are non-trivial decisions, as eCBT incurs a time cost, and guided eCBT incurs a financial cost and requires interactions with a supporter for patients who desire independence and privacy. Further, eCBT has the potential to harm, as when lack of engagement leads the patient to drop out of all treatment, including ADM, whereas that patient would have remitted with ADM. Our heterogeneity of treatment effects (HTE) analyses will examine which patients profit from guided eCBT, which do equally well or better with unguided than guided eCBT, and which do as well or better with ADM in the absence of eCBT. A good deal of research has been carried out on eCBT HTE, although not in conjunction with ADM. This research suggests that the value of eCBT for MDD varies considerably depending on diverse patient characteristics the investigators plan to study. As with the comparative effectiveness evidence for eCBT vs other MDD therapies, though, research on MDD HTE up to now has focused on narrowly-defined symptom outcomes. In addition, although more than two dozen consistently significant baseline patient-reported predictors of MDD HTE have been documented, no single study ever considered more than a handful of these predictors. In addition, past MDD HTE studies have been underpowered. Our analysis will be based on a sample of 3,360 patients powered to detect HTE in the entire sample. Our patient and provider partners have indicated that evidence about the prescriptive predictors of these differences will be of great value in their treatment selection decisions. The causal model underlying the design is drawn from previous studies reviewed here: that MDD remission of primary care patients can be increased by adding eCBT to treatment-as-usual (TAU) via mechanisms that include influencing cognitions and behaviors to promote psychological recovery and encouraging increased ADM compliance. This model underlies all aspects of our design (selection of population, interventions, measures, analytic methods, procedures for handling confounding, time frame).
- Conditions
- Major Depressive Disorder
- Being tested
- remote internet-based cognitive behavior therapy (eCBT)
- Keywords
- Depression, eCBT
- Medical subject headings
- Depressive Disorder, Major, Depression
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
remote internet-based cognitive behavior therapy (eCBT)Behavioural
Provide access to online psychotherapy program to participants in rural WV areas at no expense to them.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Care Treatment | No intervention | The participant will receive treatment as usual as prescribed by the primary care physician for MDD. |
| Primary care treatment with eCBT | Active comparator | The participant will receive treatment as usual as prescribed by the primary care physician with the addition of eCBT for MDD. Receives: Behavioral: remote internet-based cognitive behavior therapy (eCBT) |
| Primary care treatment with guided eCBT | Active comparator | The participant will receive treatment as usual as prescribed by the primary care physician with the addition of guided eCBT for MDD. Receives: Behavioral: remote internet-based cognitive behavior therapy (eCBT) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
RDQ-7
Investigators will assess all study patients remission from depression with the Remission from Depression Questionnaire (RDQ-7) via self-report assessments at 16 week follow-up. Investigators will monitor patients at 26, 39, and 52 weeks to evaluate the long-term maintenance of remission (or recurrence). The RDQ-7 is a measure with 41 items. Items are reported on a 3-point rating scale (0=not at all or rarely true; 1 = sometimes; 2 = often or almost always true). The total scale score ranges from 0-82. Participants with a total score below or equal to 27 are considered in remission. Higher total scores reflect greater pathology.
Measured: 16-Week Follow-up
Secondary outcomes (3)
PROMIS Short Form v1.0 - Severity of Substance Use (past 30 days)
The investigators will assess all study participants severity of substance use using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Short Form v1.0 - Severity of Substance Use (past 30 days) at 16 week follow-up. Investigators will monitor participants at 26, 39, and 52 weeks to evaluate the long-term durability of our intervention. The PROMIS) Short Form v1.0 - Severity of Substance Use (past 30 days) is a measure with 7 items. Items are reported with five response options ranging in value from one to five. To calculate the total scale score, items are summed resulting in a range from 1-35. Higher total scores reflect that a participant uses a substance with greater severity.
Measured: 16 week Follow-up
Compliance with Antidepressant Medication Treatment
The investigators will assess all study participants adherence to antidepressant medication (if applicable) using electronic medical record data at 16 week follow-up. Investigators will monitor participants at 26, 39, and 52 weeks to evaluate the long-term durability of our intervention. Electronic medical record data will be examined for antidepressant medication prescriptions and prescription refills or changes.
Measured: 16 week Follow-up
SDM-Q-9
The investigators will assess all study participants involvement with shared decision-making regarding depression treatment provided by their primary care physician using the Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) at 52 week follow-up. The SDM-Q-9 is a nine item measure. Items are reported with six response options ranging from 0, "completely disagree", to 5, "completely agree". To calculate the total scale score, items are summed resulting in a range from 0-45. Higher scores reflect a participant's participation in shared decision making regarding their treatment.
Measured: 52 week Follow-up
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted9 Oct 2019
- Study start9 Jan 2021
- Primary completion31 Dec 2025
- Study completion30 Jan 2026
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Major Depressive DisorderStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of South FloridaThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- There are three treatment arms: 1) treatment as usual 2) treatment as usual with unguided eCBT and 3) treatment as usual with guided eCBT
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 1,280 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of South Florida
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Robert Bossarte, University of South Florida
- Investigators
- Robert Bossarte, PhD, Principal investigator, University of South FloridaRonald Kessler, PhD, Principal investigator, Harvard Medical School (HMS and HSDM)
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04120285
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- PCS-2017C3-9252
- Acronym
- AMHI
- Status last verified
- Mar 2026
- First submitted
- 31 May 2019
- Last updated
- 27 Mar 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Bossarte RM, Kessler RC, Nierenberg AA, Chattopadhyay A, Cuijpers P, Enrique A, Foxworth PM, Gildea SM, Belnap BH, Haut MW, Law KB, Lewis WD, Liu H, Luedtke AR, Pigeon WR, Rhodes LA, Richards D, Rollman BL, Sampson NA, Stokes CM, Torous J, Webb TD, Zubizarreta JR. The Appalachia Mind Health Initiative (AMHI): a pragmatic randomized clinical trial of adjunctive internet-based cognitive behavior therapy for treating major depressive disorder among primary care patients. Trials. 2022 Jun 20;23(1):520. doi: 10.1186/s13063-022-06438-y.
PubMed 35725644
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 Mar 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Remote Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Major Depression (RTD) in Primary Care
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04120285
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- AMHI / PCS-2017C3-9252
- Conditions
- Major Depressive Disorder
- Keywords
- Depression, eCBT
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 1,280 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of South FloridaUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
- Study start
- 9 Jan 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Jan 2026 (actual)
- First posted
- 9 Oct 2019 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
We propose to carry out a treatment experiment in which we evaluate the extent to which randomizing primary care clinicians have access to remote internet-based Cognitive Behavior Therapy (eCBT) in rural West Virginia (WV) and Kentucky (KY) will help improve treatment of patients with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). WV and KY are two of the most rural states in America and mental health treatment resources are low; especially in rural parts of the state.
Detailed description
The investigators propose a pragmatic trial of the comparative effectiveness of two levels of remote internet-based cognitive behavior therapy (eCBT) to treat major depressive disorder (MDD) with and without comorbidities. The investigators intend to recruit 3,360 patients receiving primary care MDD treatment throughout West Virginia (WV) and Kentucky (KY). The investigators two main aims will be to use experimental methods to evaluate the aggregate effects of these interventions on patient-centered outcomes and to investigate predictors of heterogeneity of treatment effects. MDD treatment in WV \& KY is far from optimal, with rural patients especially underserved. WV is the 2nd most rural state in the US, has the 2nd lowest per capita income and has the highest proportion of residents covered by Medicaid. Need for services is high, as indicated by WV having the highest suicide rate of any state east of the Mississippi River and the highest opioid death rate in the country. Yet WV ranks only 42nd in overall mental health care. The vast majority of MDD treatment in rural areas is in primary care and consists largely of antidepressant medication (ADM). Electronic medical records (EMRs) show that 88% of primary care MDD patients in WV's FQHCs are treated exclusively with ADM and that the other 12% are treated with ADM plus psychotherapy. The limited number of patients who can access psychotherapy usually must go on a waiting list (often 3+ months) and travel long distances for treatment once available. Access to telephone or videoconference psychotherapy is limited. Yet 75% of depressed primary care patients express a desire for psychotherapy either alone (40%) or in combination with ADM (35%).
This mismatch between treatment availability and preference is important because MDD remission increases substantially when patients are treated with their preferred type. There is thus good reason to believe that providing access to eCBT will improve MDD treatment outcomes in our trial. Indeed, prior controlled trials show that both types of eCBT the investigators will randomize yield significantly better outcomes than waiting list controls. Controlled trials also show that guided eCBT yields equivalent outcomes to telephone and face-to-face CBT, but at much lower cost. Other controlled trials show that combined CBT-ADM yield significantly better outcomes than either CBT-alone or ADM-alone, although these comparisons have been made only for face-to-face CBT. These results provide good reason to believe that offering eCBT in rural FQHCs throughout WV and KY could improve MDD outcomes. Existing research on eCBT in rural areas, while promising, has been limited, making the research the investigators propose important to provide actionable information for patients and other stakeholders. Results intend to inform decisions about whether to offer/use eCBT, with what level of guidance, and for whom.
Unguided eCBT is web-based CBT completed with computerized feedback but no clinician involvement after an initial orientation meeting. Guided eCBT is web-based CBT completed with a remote eCoach who communicates with the patient via email, text, and telephone. eCoaches also provide elements of remote collaborative care case management, such as encouraging ADM adherence, monitoring ADM side effects and treatment response, coordinating with the primary care physician (PCP), and facilitating specialty referral. Collaborative care is known to be highly effective in promoting MDD symptomatic remission. In addition, a study in Arkansas FQHCs found that remote collaborative care case management out-performed on-site case management in rural clinics too small to justify having a dedicated mental health case manager on staff. However, remote collaborative care case management often involves delivering telephone CBT. A major constraint on expanding the collaborative care model for primary care MDD treatment, which has been used in urban but not rural WV clinics, is lack of case managers who can deliver telephone CBT. Thus, expanding eCBT in rural WV would allow offering a strongly evidence-based form of patients' preferred treatment (psychotherapy) and a form of a well-validated rural MDD care model (collaborative care case management with guided eCBT) that cannot be offered currently because of limited clinical resources.
Given its documented efficacy and rapid spread, the investigators expect eCBT to become widely available in rural WV as a result of our trial. But two real-life decisional dilemmas will arise in that context. Primary care clinicians will be faced with the decision about when to recommend eCBT and at what level of intensity. Patients will be faced with the decision of whether to accept guided or unguided eCBT as part of their treatment plan. These are non-trivial decisions, as eCBT incurs a time cost, and guided eCBT incurs a financial cost and requires interactions with a supporter for patients who desire independence and privacy. Further, eCBT has the potential to harm, as when lack of engagement leads the patient to drop out of all treatment, including ADM, whereas that patient would have remitted with ADM. Our heterogeneity of treatment effects (HTE) analyses will examine which patients profit from guided eCBT, which do equally well or better with unguided than guided eCBT, and which do as well or better with ADM in the absence of eCBT. A good deal of research has been carried out on eCBT HTE, although not in conjunction with ADM. This research suggests that the value of eCBT for MDD varies considerably depending on diverse patient characteristics the investigators plan to study. As with the comparative effectiveness evidence for eCBT vs other MDD therapies, though, research on MDD HTE up to now has focused on narrowly-defined symptom outcomes. In addition, although more than two dozen consistently significant baseline patient-reported predictors of MDD HTE have been documented, no single study ever considered more than a handful of these predictors. In addition, past MDD HTE studies have been underpowered. Our analysis will be based on a sample of 3,360 patients powered to detect HTE in the entire sample. Our patient and provider partners have indicated that evidence about the prescriptive predictors of these differences will be of great value in their treatment selection decisions. The causal model underlying the design is drawn from previous studies reviewed here: that MDD remission of primary care patients can be increased by adding eCBT to treatment-as-usual (TAU) via mechanisms that include influencing cognitions and behaviors to promote psychological recovery and encouraging increased ADM compliance. This model underlies all aspects of our design (selection of population, interventions, measures, analytic methods, procedures for handling confounding, time frame).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 3
- Model description
- There are three treatment arms: 1) treatment as usual 2) treatment as usual with unguided eCBT and 3) treatment as usual with guided eCBT
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Care Treatment | No intervention | –The participant will receive treatment as usual as prescribed by the primary care physician for MDD. |
| Primary care treatment with eCBT | Active comparator | Behavioral: remote internet-based cognitive behavior therapy (eCBT)The participant will receive treatment as usual as prescribed by the primary care physician with the addition of eCBT for MDD. |
| Primary care treatment with guided eCBT | Active comparator | Behavioral: remote internet-based cognitive behavior therapy (eCBT)The participant will receive treatment as usual as prescribed by the primary care physician with the addition of guided eCBT for MDD. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- seeking MDD treatment for the first time in the past 6 months (i.e., the beginning of a first or new course of treatment),
- appropriate for outpatient treatment,
- literate in English,
- has access to a smart phone, home computer or willing to travel to access a computer
- without hearing or vision or cognitive impairment that would interfere with research data collection
Key exclusion criteria (0 listed)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| remote internet-based cognitive behavior therapy (eCBT)Provide access to online psychotherapy program to participants in rural WV areas at no expense to them. | Behavioural | Primary care treatment with eCBT, Primary care treatment with guided eCBT |
Primary outcome
RDQ-7
Time frame: 16-Week Follow-up
Investigators will assess all study patients remission from depression with the Remission from Depression Questionnaire (RDQ-7) via self-report assessments at 16 week follow-up. Investigators will monitor patients at 26, 39, and 52 weeks to evaluate the long-term maintenance of remission (or recurrence). The RDQ-7 is a measure with 41 items. Items are reported on a 3-point rating scale (0=not at all or rarely true; 1 = sometimes; 2 = often or almost always true). The total scale score ranges from 0-82. Participants with a total score below or equal to 27 are considered in remission. Higher total scores reflect greater pathology.
3 secondary outcomes
PROMIS Short Form v1.0 - Severity of Substance Use (past 30 days)
Time frame: 16 week Follow-up
Compliance with Antidepressant Medication Treatment
Time frame: 16 week Follow-up
SDM-Q-9
Time frame: 52 week Follow-up
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 27 Mar 2026.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 35725644Bossarte RM, Kessler RC, Nierenberg AA, Chattopadhyay A, Cuijpers P, Enrique A, Foxworth PM, Gildea SM, Belnap BH, Haut MW, Law KB, Lewis WD, Liu H, Luedtke AR, Pigeon WR, Rhodes LA, Richards D, Rollman BL, Sampson NA, Stokes CM, Torous J, Webb TD, Zubizarreta JR. The Appalachia Mind Health Initiative (AMHI): a pragmatic randomized clinical trial of adjunctive internet-based cognitive behavior therapy for treating major depressive disorder among primary care patients. Trials. 2022 Jun 20;23(1):520. doi: 10.1186/s13063-022-06438-y.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Major Depressive Disorder
Recruiting
Affective Cognitive Training in Mood Disorders and High-risk Relatives
Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), Bipolar Disorder (BD)
Active, not recruiting
Feasibility of Home-Based Intermittent 60Hz Light Therapy for Major Depressive Disorder (MDD)
Depression, MDD
RecruitingPhase 2
ACP-211 Monotherapy for Major Depressive Disorder With Inadequate Antidepressant Response
Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant
RecruitingPhase 2
Study of Neuro-Cognitive Correlates of Pediatric Anxiety Disorders
Anxiety Disorders, Major Depressive Disorder
Recruiting
Digital Interventions for Relapse Prevention in Adolescence
Major Depression Disorder, ANXIETY DISORDERS (or Anxiety and Phobic Neuroses)
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Robert Bossarte, PhD principal investigator
University of South Florida
Ronald Kessler, PhD principal investigator
Harvard Medical School (HMS and HSDM)
7 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing remote internet-based cognitive behavior therapy (eCBT) in people with Major Depressive Disorder, run by University of South Florida at 7 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 0 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Mar 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 7 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
RDQ-7 (time frame: 16-Week Follow-up). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04120285, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 27 Mar 2026.