Confirmatory Efficacy Trial of Attention Bias Modification for Depression
- Conditions
- Depression
- Interventions
- Behavioral: Gamified Attention Bias ModificationBehavioral: Sham Attention Bias ModificationBehavioral: Traditional Attention Bias Modification
- Registration Number
- NCT06361095
- Lead Sponsor
- University of Texas at Austin
- Brief Summary
The goal of this clinical trial is to compare the efficacy of two related, but different ABM (Attention Biased Modification) treatments for depression in adults with elevated symptoms of depression. The main aims are:
* Aim 1:examine whether gamified ABM leads to greater change in the primary and secondary outcomes than sham ABM
* Aim 1: establish that gamified ABM is at least as effective as traditional ABM.
* Aim 2: identify moderators of ABM efficacy and mechanisms responsible for its efficacy.
* Aim 3: Identify the durability of ABM on depression symptoms during short-term follow-up
Participants will complete self-report questionnaires, complete eye-tracking tasks, and be clinically assessed through interviews by clinician researchers.
If there is a comparison group: Researchers will compare sham, traditional, and gamified treatment groups to see if they moderate symptoms of depression.
- Detailed Description
The overall goal of this project is to conduct a well-powered confirmatory efficacy trial comparing a gamified, attention bias modification (ABM) mobile application and traditional ABM to sham ABM among adults with elevated symptoms of depression. The proposed R01 efficacy trial follows the NIMH intervention development sequence as it builds upon prior NIMH-funded experimental therapeutics work, specifically R21MH092430 "Attention training for Major Depressive Disorder" and R33MH109600 "Development of attention bias modification for depression". This prior work demonstrates that active ABM engages and alters negative attention bias and there is a preliminary efficacy signal that ABM reduces depression. Although traditional ABM is efficacious for the treatment of depression, "gamified" forms of ABM have the potential to be more accessible and engaging than traditional ABM. Pilot work suggests that a gamified ABM can reduce negative affect; however, its effectiveness for depression has not yet been established. Thus, investigators are proposing to conduct a well-powered, confirmatory efficacy trial to determine ABM's potential for the treatment of depression. In Aim 1, the investigators will examine the efficacy of ABM in a large sample of adults (N = 600) with elevated symptoms of depression. The investigators hypothesize that gamified and traditional ABM will lead to significantly greater reductions in self-reported and interviewer-rated depression symptoms than sham ABM. The investigators further hypothesize that traditional ABM will be non-inferior to gamified ABM (treatment superiority between the ABM conditions will also be tested). In Aim 2, the investigators will examine putative moderators and mediators of ABM. Based on ABM research with anxious populations, it is predicted that people with a strong initial attentional bias for sad stimuli will experience greater reductions in depression in response to either gamified or traditional ABM than sham ABM. In terms of mediation, compared to sham ABM, the investigators hypothesize that gamified and traditional ABM will: (1) decrease negative attentional bias measured behaviorally with reliable eye tracking methods; (2) significantly reduce depression; and (3) improve depression symptoms via their influence on negative attentional bias. Selection of the putative mediators is informed by our prior R33 ABM trial, where it was found that gaze bias away from sad stimuli mediated the effect of traditional ABM on depression symptom change. In Aim 3, an exploratory aim, the investigators will estimate the durability of ABM by collecting post-treatment symptom data 1-, 2-, 3-, and 6-months after ABM completion. Symptom change and reliable recovery across a six-month follow-up period will be estimated. Currently, the durability of ABM effects for depression is unknown, as few well-powered ABM studies for depression have obtained follow-up data. This trial would provide the most definitive data to date regarding whether ABM for depression is a promising treatment for depression.
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- NOT_YET_RECRUITING
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 600
- Provided informed consent
- Fluent in English
- Scored 13 or greater on the QIDS-SR at the baseline assessment
- Between the ages of 18 to 70
- Have had no changes in medication and dosage in the past 12 weeks (if currently on antidepressant medication)
- Reported suicidal behavior or significant suicidal ideation within the past six months using the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS)
- Met criteria for current or past bipolar or psychotic disorders
- Current (i.e., within the past 12 months) substance use disorders of moderate or greater severity on the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI)
- Currently taking opioid analgesics or systemic corticosteroid use as these medications
- Currently receiving psychotherapy
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- PARALLEL
- Arm && Interventions
Group Intervention Description Gamified Attention Bias Modification Gamified Attention Bias Modification This ABM variant will be completed on participants' mobile devices (iOS or Android). During app use, they will be presented with sad-happy stimulus pairs followed by target probes (tracing a path) always appearing at the happy stimulus location. Sham Attention Bias Modification Sham Attention Bias Modification Sham and traditional ABM interventions will be identical in all respects with one critical exception. For sham ABM, after stimuli offset the target will appear with equal probability (50%) in the location of the neutral or the dysphoric stimulus. Traditional Attention Bias Modification Traditional Attention Bias Modification This ABM variant is a web-based program delivered to participants via a computer. It presents pairs of stimuli to the right and left visual fields from two stimulus categories: sad or neutral facial expressions from the Pictures of Facial Affect (POFA) collection and dysphoric or neutral scenes from or from the International Affective Picture System (IAPS) collection.
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method QIDS (Quick Inventory of Depression Symptoms) SR-16 Screening, Baseline, Weeks 1-4 (Acute Period), Weeks 12-28 (Follow-Up Period) The Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptoms (QIDS) is a 16-item measure (self-report and clinician-rated versions) for adults with depression with solid psychometric properties and substantial data supporting sensitivity to change. The QIDS assesses the criterion domains used to diagnose a major depressive disorder.
The participant must score a minimum of 13 on the QIDS-SR at the baseline assessment to qualify for participation. Total QIDS scores range from 0 to 27, with higher scores reflecting greater severity of depression, and thus, worst outcomes for our study.
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) Baseline, Weeks 1-4 (Acute Period), Weeks 12-28 (Follow-Up Period) Interviewer-rated measure of depression symptom severity. Scoring for this assessment can range from a minimum total score of 0 (least severe) and a maximum score of 52 (most severe). Higher scores mean worse outcomes.
Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS) Baseline, Weeks 1-4 (Acute Period), Weeks 12-28 (Follow-Up Period) Self-report measure of anhedonia severity. SHAPS total score ranges from 0 to 14, with higher scores meaning worse outcomes.
Perseverative Thinking Questionnaire (PTQ) Baseline, Weeks 1-4 (Acute Period), Weeks 12-28 (Follow-Up Period) A content-independent measures of repetitive negative thinking. PTQ total score for 15 items ranges from 0 to 60, with higher scores indicating worse outcomes.
Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Baseline, Weeks 1-4 (Acute Period), Weeks 12-28 (Follow-Up Period) Self-report measure of symptom-related disability. SDS total score ranges from 0 (unimpaired) to 30 (highly impaired). Higher scores mean a worse outcome.
Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) Baseline, Weeks 1-4 (Acute Period), Weeks 12-28 (Follow-Up Period) Self-report measure of anxiety symptom severity. GAD-7 total score for the seven items ranges from 0 to 21, with higher scores indicating worse outcomes.
Trial Locations
- Locations (1)
Institute for Mental Health Research
🇺🇸Austin, Texas, United States