Investigating the Efficacy of the Web-Based Common Elements Toolbox (COMET) Single-Session Interventions in Improving UK University Student Well-Being: Randomized Controlled Trial
Abstract
Background Mental health problems in university students are associated with many negative outcomes, yet there is a gap between need and timely access to help. Single-session interventions (SSIs) are designed to be scalable and accessible, delivering core evidence-based intervention components within a one-off encounter. Objective COMET (Common Elements Toolbox) is an online self-help SSI that includes behavioral activation, cognitive restructuring, gratitude, and self-compassion. COMET has previously been evaluated in India, Kenya, and the United States with promising results. This study tests the acceptability, appropriateness, perceived utility, and efficacy of COMET among UK university students during the peripandemic period. Methods We conducted a randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of COMET compared with a control group, with 2- and 4-week follow-ups. Outcome variables were subjective well-being, depression severity, anxiety severity, positive affect, negative affect, and perceived stress. We also measured intervention satisfaction immediately after completion of COMET. All UK university students with access to the internet were eligible to participate and were informed of the study online. The data were analyzed using linear mixed models and reported in accordance with the CONSORT-EHEALTH (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials of Electronic and Mobile Health Applications and Online Telehealth) checklist. Results Of the 831 people screened, 468…
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: 831 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Global, regional, and national burden of hepatitis B, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019
- A meta‐analysis of anal cancer incidence by risk group: Toward a unified anal cancer risk scale
- Global fertility in 204 countries and territories, 1950–2021, with forecasts to 2100: a comprehensive demographic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021
- Exercise interventions in Alzheimer's disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
- Prognostic Significance of Carbonic Anhydrase IX Expression in Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis
- Glucocorticoid Resistance: Is It a Requisite for Increased Cytokine Production in Depression? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
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.