Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41287827›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025

An opportunistic qualitative evaluation of the acceptability and feasibility of remote cognitive behavioral group intervention for bipolar disorder.

Elizabeth Newton, Alex Copello, Alison Rolfe, Katie Edwards, Sarah Moonakova, Arielle Kaufman, Radha Yagnik, Olivia James, Anne Leadbitter, Gurvir Matharu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Elizabeth Newton *Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Alex Copello *Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Alison RolfeWest Midlands Institute of Psychotherapy, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Katie EdwardsBirmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Sarah MoonakovaBirmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Arielle KaufmanBirmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Radha YagnikBirmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Olivia JamesSchool of Psychology, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Anne LeadbitterSchool of Psychology, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Gurvir MatharuBirmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many mental health services had to adapt the way in which their services were delivered. Research exploring the effectiveness of remote therapy and interventions, especially within the bipolar disorder population, is lacking. The pandemic presented an opportunity to conduct an opportunistic evaluation of a group CBT intervention for bipolar disorder which began face-to-face and transitioned to remote delivery. Service users had a unique experience of having experienced both delivery methods during the same intervention. The intervention had not previously been adapted or investigated in terms of online delivery and it was imperative to gain in-depth insight into service users and staff member's experiences. The overarching aim of this evaluation was to provide qualitative insight into service users' and staff members' experiences of the feasibility and acceptability of online as compared and contrasted to face-to-face CBT intervention for bipolar disorder. Methods: A qualitative method was used to provide an in-depth, contextualized understanding of individual perceptions and experiences of two contrasting group delivery formats, face-to-face and remote. Individual interviews were undertaken with service users and a focus group was held with staff facilitating the group. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: The evaluation suggests that using video technology can be an effective way of delivering intervention to this client group and may have additional benefits such as easier access for some service users by reducing need to travel, easier access when struggling with mental health and aid in concentration when processing the group content. Collectively the analyses suggest that before embracing the use of technology for delivering psychological group interventions, we need to be cautious and consider clinical, group and practical processes that may be impacted and work towards diminishing these drawbacks. These factors and processes are discussed, including symptom management, accessibility, relationships and bonding, risk management and introducing a hybrid model. Discussion: This study provides initial support for the feasibility of delivering group CBT for bipolar disorder online and its acceptability. However, it also highlights some challenges and clinical considerations. Moving forward, services could consider offering service users a choice of either face-to-face or online delivery which may widen access to psychological interventions and promote inclusivity. Further research, both qualitative and quantitative, is needed within the bipolar population to explore remote delivery and help guide services when delivering online psychological interventions.

Indexed as

bipolar disorderCBTCOVID-19group interventiononline therapypsychoeducationremote deliverytelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID41287827
PMCPMC12640508

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.