Efficacy and safety of interactive digital therapeutics with cognitive behavioral therapy for depressive symptoms in patients with major depressive disorder: A multicenter, randomized, assessor-blinded trial versus an active mood diary control
In brief
Interactive digital CBT cut depression scores 13 vs 7 points, but analyses differed
In an 8-week trial of 110 adults, interactive digital cognitive behavioral therapy reduced BDI-II scores by 13.34 points, compared with 6.54 points with a mood diary. Other depression and anxiety measures also favored the therapy, but effects on self-reported depression were not consistent across analysis methods. The short-term findings need confirmation in longer studies.
- Journal
- Journal of affective disorders (Q1)
- Published
- 21 October 2026
- Study design
- Randomized controlled trial
- Evidence level
- Level 1, High (CEBM 1b)
- Authors
- Yoo Jin Jang, Woojae Myung, C Hyung Keun Park, Hong Jin Jeon
- PMID
- 42906705
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.jad.2026.122653
Why clinicians should know about it
- Picked for Psychiatry and Mental Health (top studies of the week, 8 November 2026): Randomized digital CBT trial in major depressive disorder
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Digital cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is effective for major depressive disorder, but many interventions use static, non-interactive content. Interactive digital therapeutics with CBT (iDT-CBT) provides adaptive, dialogue-based interventions. METHODS: We conducted an 8-week randomized, assessor-blinded trial comparing iDT-CBT with an active mood diary control in 110 adults with major depressive disorder. The primary outcome was change in BDI-II score at Week 8. Secondary outcomes included PHQ-9, MADRS, and BAI. Analyses included all randomized participants, using analysis of covariance adjusted for baseline score and sex. RESULTS: BDI-II improvement was greater with iDT-CBT than with the active mood diary (13.34 vs. 6.54 points; adjusted p = 0.0003). PHQ-9, MADRS, and BAI improvements also favored iDT-CBT. Week 8 remission proportions were higher with iDT-CBT for BDI-II (30.4% vs. 9.3%), PHQ-9 (62.5% vs. 44.4%), MADRS (23.2% vs. 5.6%), and BAI (50.0% vs. 20.4%). In logistic regression adjusted for baseline score and sex, the conditional odds of remission favored iDT-CBT for all four outcomes (p = 0.011, 0.039, 0.014, and 0.002, respectively), although the unadjusted risk-difference confidence interval for PHQ-9 included zero. However, the BDI-II effect was attenuated in the site-adjusted mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM), and BDI-II and PHQ-9 effects were not significant in MMRM, multiple-imputation, or observed-case analyses. MADRS and BAI remained significant. No adverse-event-related discontinuations or intervention-related serious adverse events occurred. DISCUSSION: iDT-CBT showed promising short-term efficacy, although effects on self-reported depressive symptoms were sensitive to the analytical method. Longer-term studies are needed. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Research Information Service identifier: KCT0010758 (https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/detailSearch.do?seq=30575).
Abstract as published, via PubMed.
For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.