Table 4:

Secondary and exploratory endpoints

	Estimate (95% CI)	p value	Cohen’s d (95% CI)
WHOQOL-BREF psychological domain
Control vs stand-alone iCBT	−8·29 (−12·50 to −4·08)	<0·0001	−0·78 (−1·10 to −0·45)
Control vs guided iCBT	−7·95 (−12·32 to −3·59)	<0·0001	−0·76 (−1·10 to −0·42)
WHOQOL-BREF physical domain
Control vs stand-alone iCBT	−6·99 (−11·18 to −2·82)	0·0002	−0·62 (−0·94 to −0·29)
Control vs guided iCBT	−6·05 (−10·37 to −1·72)	0·0021	−0·59 (−0·92 to −0·25)
WHOQOL-BREF social relationships domain
Control vs stand-alone iCBT	−5·31 (−10·26 to −0·37)	0·0164	−0·41 (−0·73 to −0·09)
Control vs guided iCBT	−2·32 (−7·41 to 2·77)	0·25	−0·19 (−0·52 to 0·13)
WHOQOL-BREF environmental domain
Control vs stand-alone iCBT	−4·46 (−7·84 to −1·08)	0·0035	−0·57 (−0·89 to −0·25)
Control vs guided iCBT	−4·08 (−7·55 to −0·61)	0·0091	−0·52 (−0·85 to −0·19)
MSIS psychological domain
Control vs stand-alone iCBT	9·02 (3·61 to 14·43)	0·0003	0·76 (0·43 to 1·09)
Control vs guided iCBT	7·77 (2·21 to 13·33)	0·0021	0·62 (0·29 to 0·95)
MSIS physical domain
Control vs stand-alone iCBT	3·70 (0·15 to 7·24)	0·0197	0·39 (0·07 to 0·71)
Control vs guided iCBT	2·57 (1·09 to 6·22)	0·10	0·30 (−0·03 to 0·63)
FSMC
Control vs stand-alone iCBT	2·93 (−0·57 to 6·42)	0·0574	0·30 (−0·02 to 0·62)
Control vs guided iCBT	1·94 (−1·66 to 5·54)	0·19	0·22 (−0·11 to 0·55)
CFS
Control vs stand-alone iCBT	1·49 (−0·23 to 3·02)	0·0495	0·29 (−0·03 to 0·61)
Control vs guided iCBT	0·20 (−1·56 to 1·97)	0·56	0·03 (−0·30 to 0·35)
MADRS
Control vs stand-alone iCBT	3·16 (0·84 to 5·48)	0·0026	0·59 (0·25 to 0·94)
Control vs guided iCBT	2·98 (0·61 to 5·35)	0·0053	0·54 (0·19 to 0·90)

Data are the difference in score (points) between the two groups specified on the stated scales at week 12. CFS=Chalder Fatigue Scale. FSMC=Fatigue Scale for Motor and Cognitive Functions. iCBT=internet-based cognitive behavioural therapy. MADRS=Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale. MSIS=Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale. WHOQOL-BREF=WHO Quality of Life-Brief Version.