| Title |
Effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy integrated with systematic desensitization, cognitive behavioral therapy combined with eye movement desensitization and reprocessing therapy, and cognitive behavioral therapy combined with virtual reality exposure therapy methods in the treatment of flight anxiety: a randomized trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ndt.s93401 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maria Teresa Triscari, Palmira Faraci, Dario Catalisano, Valerio D’Angelo, Viviana Urso |
| Abstract |
The purpose of the research was to compare the effectiveness of the following treatment methods for fear of flying: cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) integrated with systematic desensitization, CBT combined with eye movement desensitization and reprocessing therapy, and CBT combined with virtual reality exposure therapy. Overall, our findings have proven the efficacy of all interventions in reducing fear of flying in a pre- to post-treatment comparison. All groups showed a decrease in flight anxiety, suggesting the efficiency of all three treatments in reducing self-report measures of fear of flying. In particular, our results indicated significant improvements for the treated patients using all the treatment programs, as shown not only by test scores but also by participation in the post-treatment flight. Nevertheless, outcome measures maintained a significant effect at a 1-year follow-up. In conclusion, combining CBT with both the application of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing treatment and the virtual stimuli used to expose patients with aerophobia seemed as efficient as traditional cognitive behavioral treatments integrated with systematic desensitization. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 210 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 205 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 43 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 27 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 23 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 8% |
| Researcher | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 29 | 14% |
| Unknown | 59 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 80 | 38% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 22 | 10% |
| Unknown | 67 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 December 2020.
All research outputs
#4,262,161
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#590
of 3,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,957
of 286,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#11
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,132 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 286,877 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.