Published in

Taylor and Francis Group, Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 2(38), p. 83-90, 2009

DOI: 10.1080/16506070802675239

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Meta-analysis of computer-aided psychotherapy: Problems and partial solutions

Journal article published in 2009 by Isaac M. Marks, Pim Cuijpers ORCID, Kate Cavanagh ORCID, Annemieke van Straten ORCID, Lina Gega, Gerhard Andersson
This paper is available in a repository.
This paper is available in a repository.

Full text: Download

Red circle
Preprint: archiving forbidden
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Upload
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Policy details
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Meta‐analysis can be valuable if it heeds its originators' caution that intimate communing with the data is essential. A critique of the authors' own meta‐analysis shows that the danger of overly broad conclusions could be reduced by attention to specificities and awareness of potentially hidden sources of variance. Conclusions from even good meta‐analyses are best placed in perspective, along with naturalistic reviews, open studies, and even anecdotes to yield a fair picture of what computer‐aided psychotherapy or any other treatment can achieve under varying conditions. The most realistic picture comes from zooming in and out and melding meta‐analyses with further types of evidence.