+1 Recommend
2 collections

      To submit your manuscript, please click here

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The Effectiveness of Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy as a Preventive Intervention in the Workplace to Improve Work Engagement and Psychological Outcomes: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis


      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.



          Mental health has become an increasingly significant issue in the workplace. Non–health care workers are experiencing increased levels of psychological symptoms in their workplaces, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, which limited social interactions and health service access. These conditions have a negative effect on employees’ mental health and may also be associated with work-related outcomes, such as reduced levels of work engagement. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is one of the most effective methods used for treating workers with mental illness and preventing work-related psychological outcomes. The delivery of internet-based CBT (iCBT) has been established as a result of both technological improvements that have influenced health promotion and prevention components, and limited social contact and health service access.


          The purpose of this systematic review is to synthesize the best available evidence concerning the preventive effect of iCBT on employees.


          A systematic search will be conducted across 12 electronic databases, including a hand search for main journals and reference lists. Randomized controlled trials testing the effects of iCBT on psychological outcomes and work engagement among employees will be eligible. Initial keywords will cover the concepts of employees, workers, non–health care personnel, internet-based, web-based, eHealth cognitive behavioral interventions, stress, depression, anxiety, and work engagement, and then a full search strategy will be developed. Following titles, abstracts and the full text will be screened for assessment against the inclusion criteria for the review. Search results will be fully reported and presented per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Two independent reviewers will screen and extract data, appraise methodological quality using the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool, and assess overall quality of evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. A random effects meta-analysis and standardized mean differences using review manager software will be applied to synthesize the effect of iCBT based on similar outcomes.


          This protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews in March 2022 and is now an ongoing process. The data will be analyzed in August 2022, and the review process should be completed by December 2022. All included studies will be synthesized and presented to demonstrate the effectiveness of iCBT in decreasing psychological distress and optimizing work engagement outcomes among employees.


          According to the findings of this study, iCBT therapies will be used to promote mental health concerns such as depressive symptoms, anxiety, psychological distress, stress, insomnia, and resilience among non–health care professionals. In addition, the results will be used to ensure the policy related to reducing psychological distress and optimizing work engagement in the workplace.

          International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)


          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews

          The methods and results of systematic reviews should be reported in sufficient detail to allow users to assess the trustworthiness and applicability of the review findings. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was developed to facilitate transparent and complete reporting of systematic reviews and has been updated (to PRISMA 2020) to reflect recent advances in systematic review methodology and terminology. Here, we present the explanation and elaboration paper for PRISMA 2020, where we explain why reporting of each item is recommended, present bullet points that detail the reporting recommendations, and present examples from published reviews. We hope that changes to the content and structure of PRISMA 2020 will facilitate uptake of the guideline and lead to more transparent, complete, and accurate reporting of systematic reviews.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found
            Is Open Access

            PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement.

            To develop an evidence-based guideline for Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies (PRESS) for systematic reviews (SRs), health technology assessments, and other evidence syntheses.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              The impact of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) as a search strategy tool on literature search quality: a systematic review

              Objective This review aimed to determine if the use of the patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) model as a search strategy tool affects the quality of a literature search. Methods A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA), Scopus, and the National Library of Medicine (NLM) catalog up until January 9, 2017. Reference lists were scrutinized, and citation searches were performed on the included studies. The primary outcome was the quality of literature searches and the secondary outcome was time spent on the literature search when the PICO model was used as a search strategy tool, compared to the use of another conceptualizing tool or unguided searching. Results A total of 2,163 records were identified, and after removal of duplicates and initial screening, 22 full-text articles were assessed. Of these, 19 studies were excluded and 3 studies were included, data were extracted, risk of bias was assessed, and a qualitative analysis was conducted. The included studies compared PICO to the PIC truncation or links to related articles in PubMed, PICOS, and sample, phenomenon of interest, design, evaluation, research type (SPIDER). One study compared PICO to unguided searching. Due to differences in intervention, no quantitative analysis was performed. Conclusions Only few studies exist that assess the effect of the PICO model vis-a-vis other available models or even vis-a-vis the use of no model. Before implications for current practice can be drawn, well-designed studies are needed to evaluate the role of the tool used to devise a search strategy.

                Author and article information

                JMIR Res Protoc
                JMIR Res Protoc
                JMIR Research Protocols
                JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )
                19 January 2023
                : 12
                : e38597
                [1 ] Boromarajonani College of Nursing Suphanburi Praboromarajchanok Institute Suphanburi Thailand
                [2 ] Department of Public Health Nursing Faculty of Public Health Mahidol University Bangkok Thailand
                [3 ] The Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine National University of Singapore Singapore Singapore
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Plernpit Boonyamalik plernpit.suw@ 123456mahidol.ac.th
                Author information
                ©Wasana Luangphituck, Plernpit Boonyamalik, Piyanee Klainin-Yobas. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (https://www.researchprotocols.org), 19.01.2023.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Research Protocols, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.researchprotocols.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

                : 8 April 2022
                : 19 October 2022
                : 9 November 2022
                : 30 November 2022

                systematic review,internet-based,cognitive behavioral therapy,work engagement,psychological outcomes,employees,workplace,web-based,occupational health,mental health,stress,depression,anxiety,ehealth,digital health


                Comment on this article