Contents of It's not All in Your Head by Asmundson and Taylor

More documents

Recommendations

Info

assignment, participants from the SHB group received instructions and the self-help book. They also received four weekly check-in sessions. WLC participants received instructions detailing when to complete questionnaires during and after the wait-list period. At mid-treatment, participants completed Assessment Package 2 online. SHB participants then received an additional four weekly check-ins. At the end of treatment, all participants either returned to AIBL for debriefing and the completion of Assessment Package 3 online or debriefing was conducted by telephone. WLC participants began the SHB treatment after completion of Assessment Package 3. Four months after completing the program, SHB participants were contacted and asked to complete follow-up questionnaires online. Treatment adherence was monitored during check-in sessions, brief telephone conversations (10 - 15 minutes), or email exchanges with facilitators or the Head Researcher if they encountered questions or difficulties during treatment. If participants were late in completing the assessment packages, facilitators or the Head Researcher contacted them to inquire about their progress. 2.4.5. Debriefing At the end of treatment, participants were contacted and scheduled for a debriefing session at AIBL or via telephone with the Head Researcher. SHB participants were told that they had received a treatment that was expected to help them with their health anxiety. As described above, CBT and self-help are supported in the research 47
literature; therefore, we had reason to believe they received helpful treatment for their symptoms. The purpose of this particular experiment was to compare a self-help treatment for health anxiety and a wait-list control condition. The SHB treatment was expected to be helpful. WLC participants were informed that they were placed on a wait- list group in order to compare the treatment with a no-treatment control condition. They were given the option to begin the SHB treatment as soon as possible. All participants were given the opportunity to discuss the treatment, ask questions, and request information about the results of the study once it is completed. 2.4.6. Data analysis Research data was downloaded from SurveyMonkey.com and AmIHealthy.com and then entered into SPSS Release 16.0. ITT analysis was carried out for all participants who were randomly assigned and remained in the study until T2. This included data from 4 participants who dropped out of the SHB group. Their data was included by employing the last observation carried forward procedure (LOCF) whereby the T2 scores of those participants were substituted for their T3 scores (Hollis & Campbell, 1999). This precluded any comparisons between T2 and T3 scores. Chi-square (χ 2 ) analyses were conducted to identify group differences based on demographics. The sample size for the study was small; therefore, t tests were used to analyze the data. Paired samples t tests were used to identify significant changes in participant scores pre- and post-treatment. 48
Page 1 and 2:
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED FEASIBILITY T
Page 3 and 4:
Abstract The purpose of this feasib
Page 5 and 6:
Acknowledgement This research was f
Page 7 and 8:
Table of Contents Abstract………
Page 9 and 10: 3.2.1. Content analysis…………
Page 11 and 12: List of figures Figure 1. The cogni
Page 13 and 14: Table C7. Comparison of WLC pre- an
Page 15 and 16: this study will inform a future, la
Page 17 and 18: Disorders Draft (APA, 2010) propose
Page 19 and 20: The cognitive symptoms of health an
Page 21 and 22: somatosensory amplification have a
Page 23 and 24: clients with health anxiety from cl
Page 25 and 26: Interview Schedule [Robins, Helzer,
Page 27 and 28: Today, effective clinically-support
Page 29 and 30: decreased disease conviction, witho
Page 31 and 32: identification and reattribution of
Page 33 and 34: within treatment sessions and as ho
Page 35 and 36: more efficacious than wait-list con
Page 37 and 38: participants‘ functioning. The CB
Page 39 and 40: at follow-up (e.g., Bouman, 2002, a
Page 41 and 42: et al., 2003). Self-help treatments
Page 43 and 44: 1.2. Statement of purpose The purpo
Page 45 and 46: an Internet format because it was m
Page 47 and 48: � Do you carry things to use in t
Page 49 and 50: dimensional scales: (a) affective s
Page 51 and 52: severe (15 - 19), and extremely sev
Page 53 and 54: 86 indicate a poor alliance. The HA
Page 55 and 56: included depression symptoms, gener
Page 57 and 58: mailed Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3 o
Page 59: equests were honored. All randomize
Page 63 and 64: 3. RESULTS 3.1. Quantitative data a
Page 65 and 66: Table 2 Demographic statistics Mean
Page 67 and 68: Table 3 Comparison of SHB pre- and
Page 69 and 70: was no significant change (t = 1.28
Page 71 and 72: subscale (n = 5); T1 M = 16.80 (SD
Page 73 and 74: treatment participants would have o
Page 75 and 76: At T2 there were significant differ
Page 77 and 78: Table 7 SHB and WLC effect size and
Page 79 and 80: sample size or greater effect size
Page 81 and 82: 3.2.1. Content analysis 3.2. Qualit
Page 83 and 84: analysis resulted in the descriptio
Page 85 and 86: During the creating subcategories a
Page 87 and 88: coded the entire data set. There we
Page 89 and 90: anxiety. After ethical clearance wa
Page 91 and 92: SHB group symptoms when compared to
Page 93 and 94: pain, fatigue, and poor health, tha
Page 95 and 96: 3.4. Limitations The results of thi
Page 97 and 98: usy schedules, worry about reading
Page 99 and 100: attery of tests is not recommended
Page 101 and 102: ecommended that the program is exte
Page 103 and 104: 4. REFERENCES American Psychiatric
Page 105 and 106: Barsky, A. J., Geringer, E., & Wool
Page 107 and 108: Coull, G, & Morris, P. G. (2011). T
Page 109 and 110: Furer, P., Walker, J. R., & Freesto
Page 111 and 112:
Lidbeck, J. (1997). Group therapy f
Page 113 and 114:
Nguyen, T. D., Attkisson, C. C., &
Page 115 and 116:
Salkovskis, P. M., Rimes, K. A., Wa
Page 117 and 118:
Taylor, S., Thordarson, D. S., Jang
Page 119 and 120:
5. APPENDICIES Appendix A Contents
Page 121 and 122:
o Week 4 o Week 5 o Things to Remem
Page 123 and 124:
Appendix B SELF-HELP PROGRAM FOR HE
Page 125 and 126:
Table C2 Comparison of SHB complete
Page 127 and 128:
Table C4 Comparison of SHB and WLC
Page 129 and 130:
Table C6 Comparison of WLC pre- and
Page 131 and 132:
Appendix D Draft of unconstrained c
Page 133 and 134:
Questionnaires the questionnaires T
show all

Contents of It's not All in Your Head by Asmundson and Taylor

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?