Table 4.

Patients’ ratings for therapeutic alliance.

Study, authors (publication year) and subscale		Alliance ratingsa, mean (SD)								Group differencesd
		F2Fb	F2F + smartphone	Internet program	Internet program + F2F	Internet program + TAUc	Email	Internet program + email/phone	Telephone
Andersson et al (2012) [29]
	Total	N/Ae	N/A	5.25 (0.82)	N/A	N/A	5.58 (0.82)	N/A	N/A	>.05
	Task	N/A	N/A	5.19 (0.84)	N/A	N/A	5.23 (0.83)	N/A	N/A	>.05
	Bond	N/A	N/A	5.47 (0.97)	N/A	N/A	5.86 (0.91)	N/A	N/A	>.05
	Goal	N/A	N/A	5.08 (0.92)	N/A	N/A	5.63 (0.86)	N/A	N/A	.04f
Berger et al (2018) [30]
	Total	3.48 (0.88)	N/A	N/A	3.64 (0.59)	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	>.03g
	Task	3.27 (0.89)	N/A	N/A	3.42 (0.63)	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	>.03g
	Bond	3.60 (1.00)	N/A	N/A	3.98 (0.64)	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	>.03g
	Goal	3.55 (0.99)	N/A	N/A	3.52 (0.74)	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	>.03g
Lindner et al (2014) [31]
	Total	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	58.37 (10.55)	N/A	.6
Ly et al (2015) [32]
	Total	65.7 (11.3)	63.5 (9.6)	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	.75-.37
Meyer et al (2015) [33]									N/A
	Total	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	71.0%	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Stiles-Shields et al (2014) [35]
	Total	49.9 (7.57)	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	49.7 (7.45)	.78
	Task	23.3 (4.26)	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	23.4 (4.15)	.86
	Bond	21.9 (5.21)	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	22.0 (5.13)	.76
	Goal	16.5 (2.48)	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	15.9 (2.44)	.053

^aMeans and standard deviations are displayed, except for the study by Meyer et al, where the percentage of participants rating the alliance as positive is displayed.

^bF2F: regular face-to-face psychotherapy.

^cTAU: treatment as usual.

^dP values based on t tests (Andersson et al and Ly et al), Mann-Whitney U tests (Berger et al), repeated measures analysis of variance (Lindner et al), and least square estimated means (Stiles-Shields et al).

^eN/A: not applicable.

^fStatistically significant.

^gNot statistically significant after Bonferroni correction.