Home > Comparative effectiveness of digital versus face-to-face cognitive behavioral therapy for alcohol use disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Kim, Ji Eun and Kim, Jiyeong and Choi, Nayeon and Lee, Sang Kyu and Oh, Hong Seok and Roh, Sungwon (2025) Comparative effectiveness of digital versus face-to-face cognitive behavioral therapy for alcohol use disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological Medicine, 55, e315. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291725102043.

External website: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/psychologi...

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a chronic condition that impairs health and function. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is an evidence-based treatment traditionally delivered face-to-face. Recently, digital CBT delivered online has gained prominence because of access barriers and user preferences. Although many digital CBT studies have emerged, few systematic reviews have directly compared digital and face-to-face CBT in adults with AUD. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate their comparative effectiveness. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive search identified 25 randomized controlled trials ( = 2,065) comparing these formats. A random-effects meta-analysis evaluated pre- and post-effectiveness by calculating the standardized mean change using raw score standardization (SMCR). For drinking quantity, digital CBT showed a significant pre-post effect (SMCR = 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.38 to 2.04;  = 0.004). Face-to-face CBT showed no overall significant effect (SMCR = 0.69, 95% CI: -0.16 to 1.53;  = 0.110). However, subgroup analysis of face-to-face trials showed significance for active treatment (SMCR = 1.09), but a nonsignificant negative effect for relapse prevention (SMCR = -0.72). For drinking frequency, both interventions yielded statistically significant effects; however, face-to-face CBT demonstrated a stronger effect (SMCR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.30 to 1.74;  = 0.006) than digital CBT (SMCR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.79;  < 0.001). Forest plots were generated, and Begg's test was used to assess publication bias.


Item Type
Article
Publication Type
International, Open Access, Review, Article
Drug Type
Alcohol
Intervention Type
Drug therapy, Treatment method
Date
20 October 2025
Identification #
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291725102043
Publisher
Cambridge
Volume
55
EndNote

Repository Staff Only: item control page