Skip to main content
. 2020 Mar 15;265:120–131. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2020.01.057

Table 2.

Descriptive overview of included studies.

Publication Country Funding Study group or data set Diagnostic status of participants Intervention type Comparative method Interactional variable(s) considered Raters
Antonioni (1973) USA Funding not specified (doctoral thesis) University student volunteers (n = 20)
University based counsellors (n = 10)
No specified diagnosis Counselling sessions of around 50 min Experiment
10 face-to-face participants; 10 telephone participants. Each counsellor saw one patient in each mode
  • Counsellor empathy

  • Counsellor concreteness

  • Client self-exploration

Third party
Bassilios et al. (2014) Australia Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing Recorded therapy sessions (n = 6607); 33% conducted by telephone Diagnosis of depressive and/or anxiety disorder 6–12 (or up to 18 in exceptional cases) of CBT Observational. Analysis of service records data, comparing telephone and face-to-face sessions
  • Duration

n/a
Brown (1985) Canada Some financial support provided by author's employing organisation, within which the research was conducted (doctoral thesis) Case records of individuals using an Employee Assistance Programme (n = 456)
Counsellors (n = 20)
No specified diagnosis Employee Assistance Programme. Type of counselling not further specified Observational. Analysis of case records, comparing telephone and face-to-face sessions.
  • Client openness

  • Client revealing of sensitive information

  • Duration

Therapist
Daniel (1973) USA Funding not specified (doctoral thesis) Undergraduate students (n = 41) No specified diagnosis One 30 min counselling session Experiment
19 face-to-face participants, 22 telephone participants
  • Affective self-reference/total self-reference ratio (ASR/TSR)

  • Duration

Third party
Day and Schneider (2002) USA Partially funded by a University of Illinois Graduate College Dissertation Grant (1998) and a University of Illinois Research Board Grant (1998) Adults recruited from general population (n = 80) No specified diagnosis 5 sessions of CBT Experiment
27 face-to-face participants, 26 video participants, 27 audio participants (plus wait list control)
  • Participation

Third party
Dilley et al. (1971) USA Funding not specified University students (n = 3)
Counsellors (n = 15)
No specified diagnosis Counselling (not further specified) Experiment
3 conditions: face-to-face, confessional style, telephone. Each participant took part in all three conditions
  • Empathy

Third party
Fann et al. (2015) USA Supported by the National Institutes of Health (grant R21HD53736) and the Department of Education, National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (grant H133G070016) Adults within 10 years of complicated mild to severe traumatic brain injury (n = 100) Diagnosis of major depressive disorder 12-session brief cognitive behavioural therapy. Sessions of 30–60 min Experiment. 40 telephone participants, 18 face-to-face participants, 42 usual care
  • Working Alliance

  • Duration

Patient
Hammond et al. (2012) UK Authors’ posts variously supported by the National Health Service, Department of Health and National Institute of Health Research Adults referred to low-intensity mental health service (n = 294) Diagnosis of mild to moderate depression and/or anxiety 2 or more sessions of CBT Observational. Analysis of service records data, comparison of propensity matched face-to-face vs. telephone patients.
  • Duration

n/a
Himelhoch et al. (2013) USA Project supported by the National Institute of Mental Health (R34- MH80630) Urban-dwelling HIV-infected individuals (n = 34) Diagnosis of major depressive disorder and scores of 12+ on PHQ-9 11-session manualised CBT intervention Experiment.
18 face-to-face participants, 16 telephone participants (plus treatment as usual control)
  • Working Alliance

Patient
Hinrichsen and Zwibelman (1981) USA Funding not specified Case records of students using university counselling service (n = 6178) No specified diagnosis Counselling (not further specified) Observational. Analysis of service records data, comparison of face-to-face and telephone sessions
  • Duration

n/a
Mulligan et al. (2014) UK National Institute for Health Research under its Programme Grants for Applied Research scheme (RP-PG-0606-1086) Patient-therapist dyads (n = 21) Diagnosis of non-affective psychosis (ICD-10) Recovery-focused CBT Observational (external) Study sample is of telephone participants only; findings are compared with those of previous studies that used a face-to-face sample
  • Working Alliance

Patient and therapist
Reese et al. (2002) USA Canada Mexico Funding not specified – but article based on doctoral thesis Individuals using an Employee Assistance Programme (n = 186)
No specified diagnosis Employee Assistance Programme, therapists trained in Solution Focused Therapy Observational (external) Study sample is of telephone participants only; findings are compared with those of previous studies that used a face-to-face sample
  • Working Alliance

Patient
Spizman (2001) USA Funding not specified (doctoral thesis) University students (n = 31) No specified diagnosis Four 50-min sessions of counselling Experiment
12 telephone participants, 12 face-to-face, 7 wait list control
  • Connection

  • Participation

  • Disclosure

Patient and therapist
Stephenson et al. (2003) USA Funding not specified Individuals using an Employee Assistance Programme (n = 21,000 +) No specified diagnosis Employee Assistance Programme (type of counselling not further specified) Observational. Analysis of service records data, comparing telephone sessions with face-to-face sessions
  • Duration

  • How closely the counsellor listened

Patient
Stiles-Shields et al. (2014) USA Supported by National Institute of Mental Health Grant R01 MH059708 Primary care patients (n = 325)
(n therapists not specified)
Diagnosis of major depressive disorder 18 sessions of CBT Experiment.
Face-to-face and telephone session ratings compared, respectively 140 vs. 149 patient ratings; 138 vs. 153 therapist ratings
  • Working Alliance

Patient and therapist