Evidence Hub

Negative and Positive Affect Regulation in a Transdiagnostic Internet-Based Protocol for Emotional Disorders: Randomized Controlled Trial

A. Díaz-García, A. González-Robles, A. García-Palacios, J. Fernández-Álvarez, D. Castilla, J. Bretón, R. Baños, S. Quero et al.

Journal of Medical Internet Research, 2020

216 participants · 34 citations

Abstract

Background Emotional disorders (EDs) are among the most prevalent mental disorders. Existing evidence-based psychological treatments are not sufficient to reduce the disease burden of mental disorders. It is therefore essential to implement innovative solutions to achieve a successful dissemination of psychological treatment protocols, and in this regard, the use of information and communication technologies such as the internet can be very useful. Furthermore, the literature suggests that not everyone with an ED receives the appropriate treatment. This situation has led to the development of new intervention proposals based on the transdiagnostic perspective, which attempts to address the underlying processes common to EDs. Most of these transdiagnostic interventions focus primarily on downregulating negative affectivity (NA), and less attention has been paid to strengths and the upregulation of positive affectivity, despite its importance for well-being and mental health. Objective This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of a transdiagnostic internet-based treatment for EDs in a community sample. Methods A 3-armed randomized controlled trial was conducted. A total of 216 participants were randomly assigned to a transdiagnostic internet-based protocol (TIBP), a TIBP+ positive affect (PA) component, or a waiting list (WL) control group. The treatment protocol contained core components mainly addressed to downregulate NA (ie, present-focused emotional awareness and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 216 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free