Denne siden ble automatisk oversatt og nøyaktigheten av oversettelsen er ikke garantert. Vennligst referer til engelsk versjon for en kildetekst.

Effectiveness of an AI-Integrated Proactive Thought Control Intervention for Young Adults With Social Anxiety Disorder

3. september 2026 oppdatert av: Farah Shahzadi

The Objective is to Examine the Effectiveness of Ai Integrated Proactive Thought Control for Social Anxiety Disorder and Compare Its Effectiveness With Active Control Group and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Participants With SAD Will be Recruited From Educational Setting, Will Get 8 Therapy Sessions.

Participants with Social Anxiety Disorder will be recruited from educational settings . After screening and informed consent, participants will be randomly assigned to PTC , ACG or CBT .The therapy session will be 8 session once a week, and data will be collected through psychological questionnaires in two phases at start and end of intervention.

Studieoversikt

Status

Fullført

Forhold

Intervensjon / Behandling

Studietype

Intervensjonell

Registrering (Faktiske)

75

Fase

  • Ikke aktuelt

Kontakter og plasseringer

Denne delen inneholder kontaktinformasjon for de som utfører studien, og informasjon om hvor denne studien blir utført.

Studiesteder

    • Punjab Province
      • Gujranwala, Punjab Province, Pakistan
        • Farah Shahzadi

Deltakelseskriterier

Forskere ser etter personer som passer til en bestemt beskrivelse, kalt kvalifikasjonskriterier. Noen eksempler på disse kriteriene er en persons generelle helsetilstand eller tidligere behandlinger.

Kvalifikasjonskriterier

Alder som er kvalifisert for studier

  • Voksen

Tar imot friske frivillige

Nei

Beskrivelse

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Were between 18 and 26 years of age, corresponding to the developmental period of emerging adulthood (Arnett, 2000).
  • Met DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for Social Anxiety Disorder on the SCID-5-RV (First et al., 2015).
  • Scored at or above the clinical cutoff of 30 on the LSAS-SR, indicating clinically significant social anxiety (Mennin et al., 2002).
  • Were not receiving any other form of psychological intervention at the time of the study.
  • Had sufficient English proficiency to understand instructions and complete the assessments (Flores, 2006).
  • Provided written informed consent.
  • Possessed basic computer literacy and typing skills required for the digital tasks.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Were younger than 18 or older than 26 years.
  • Did not meet DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for Social Anxiety Disorder on the SCID-5-RV.
  • Scored in the clinically significant range for general anxiety (BAI ≥ 16; Beck et al., 1988) or at or above the threshold for moderate depression (BDI-II ≥ 20; Beck et al., 1996).
  • Were currently receiving psychological treatment for any psychiatric condition.
  • Had a lifetime history of a severe psychiatric disorder other than Social Anxiety Disorder (e.g., psychosis, bipolar disorder).
  • Had a medical or neurological condition that could interfere with task completion or valid responding.
  • Were unable to complete the study procedures or assessments.
  • Had no prior experience using a computer.

Studieplan

Denne delen gir detaljer om studieplanen, inkludert hvordan studien er utformet og hva studien måler.

Hvordan er studiet utformet?

Designdetaljer

  • Primært formål: Behandling
  • Tildeling: Randomisert
  • Intervensjonsmodell: Parallell tildeling
  • Masking: Enkelt

Våpen og intervensjoner

Deltakergruppe / Arm
Intervensjon / Behandling
Eksperimentell: proactive thought control
The PTC (Proactive Thought Control) arm an AI-integrated, computerized intervention that trains proactive thought control, the anticipatory maintenance of a positive goal representation used to override an automatically primed negative response before it is produced (Braver, 2012). Across eight sessions, each pairing a Free Association Task (single-word cues) with a Sentence Completion Task (unfinished social-evaluative stems).
The two paired tasks Free Association Task (FAT) and Sentence Completion Task (SCT) form the core of the AI-integrated Proactive Thought Control (PTC) program. FAT shows a social-threat word and the participant types the first associated word, training proactive control at the lexical level; SCT then gives unfinished social-evaluative stems to complete with a benign word, extending the override to the propositional level. Both run three blocks of thirty self-paced trials per session (720 over two weeks), so every threat trial forces a positive, cue-relevant representation that overrides a primed negative associate before advancing. AI integration relies on real-time validation: SiEBERT scores sentiment and MiniLM embedding confirm semantic relevance, enforcing a positive, cue-relevant construal each trial. Feedback reinforces this accepted responses earn points, rejected one prompt revision, and the threshold relaxes after four failures and pass after eight.
Aktiv komparator: Cognitive Behavior Therapy
The CBT group served as the gold-standard comparison condition, receiving an eight-session, individually delivered cognitive-behavioral protocol adapted from the empirically supported treatment of Hope, Heimberg, and Turk (2019). To fit the study's fixed eight-session frame, it followed the manual's accelerated outline, compressing the standard sixteen-to-twenty-session course while still covering most relevant workbook chapters in order.
8-session CBT protocol ( Hope, Heimberg & Turk, 2019 manual) The CBT arm received an eight-session protocol moving from psychoeducation and the three-component model of social anxiety with an individualized Fear and Avoidance Hierarchy (Sessions 1-2), through cognitive restructuring using disputing questions from automatic thought to rational response (Sessions 3-4), to repeated graded exposure using role-plays, distress ratings, and added cognitive tools, with the final session offering core-belief work and setting post-treatment maintenance goals (Sessions 5-8)
Aktiv komparator: Active Control Group
The Active Control group was a structurally and temporally matched, computerized active comparison condition that removed the intervention's active ingredient while preserving every non-specific feature. Participants completed the same two tasks (Free Association and Sentence Completion), the same cue/stem material, same three blocks of 30 trials per session (720 across eight sessions), same self-paced presentation, practice trials, on-screen appearance, and time on task, so the two conditions were equated on stimuli, dose, feedback salience, and engagement. The key difference was the omission of the proactive-thought-control contingency.
Participants did the same two tasks as the experimental group. The Free Association Task and the Sentence Completion Task , matched on stimuli, format, and time. The key difference was that the control removed the core training element: responses were not checked for meaning against the cue, and about half of the negative answers were accepted without correction, so the link between a threat cue and forcing a positive response was broken. In short, the control group did the same tasks and got the same exposure, but without the active thinking-training component.

Hva måler studien?

Primære resultatmål

Resultatmål
Tiltaksbeskrivelse
Tidsramme
Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale-Self Report
Tidsramme: Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale-Self-Report; range 0-144; higher = worse (greater social anxiety severity)
Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
Core Belief Questionnaire (CBQ)
Tidsramme: Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
Core Belief Questionnaire-Self-Trait and -Other (17 items each, 6-point Likert); range 17-102 if items are scored 1-6; higher = more strongly endorsed negative core beliefs (worse)".
Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
Dot Probe task
Tidsramme: Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
milliseconds; more positive = stronger bias toward social threat
Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
word sentence association paradigm
Tidsramme: Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
higher = more threat-relevant interpretation bias
Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
Behavioral Avoidance Task
Tidsramme: Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
SUDS 0-100; higher = more subjective distress
Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period

Sekundære resultatmål

Resultatmål
Tiltaksbeskrivelse
Tidsramme
beck depression inventory II
Tidsramme: Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
range 0-63; higher = worse
Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period

Samarbeidspartnere og etterforskere

Det er her du vil finne personer og organisasjoner som er involvert i denne studien.

Sponsor

Studierekorddatoer

Disse datoene sporer fremdriften for innsending av studieposter og sammendragsresultater til ClinicalTrials.gov. Studieposter og rapporterte resultater gjennomgås av National Library of Medicine (NLM) for å sikre at de oppfyller spesifikke kvalitetskontrollstandarder før de legges ut på det offentlige nettstedet.

Studer hoveddatoer

Studiestart (Faktiske)

14. mars 2026

Primær fullføring (Faktiske)

12. august 2026

Studiet fullført (Faktiske)

14. august 2026

Datoer for studieregistrering

Først innsendt

29. august 2026

Først innsendt som oppfylte QC-kriteriene

3. september 2026

Først lagt ut (Faktiske)

9. september 2026

Oppdateringer av studieposter

Sist oppdatering lagt ut (Faktiske)

9. september 2026

Siste oppdatering sendt inn som oppfylte QC-kriteriene

3. september 2026

Sist bekreftet

1. september 2026

Mer informasjon

Begreper knyttet til denne studien

Andre studie-ID-numre

  • GIFT/PSY/MS/2025/004

Plan for individuelle deltakerdata (IPD)

Planlegger du å dele individuelle deltakerdata (IPD)?

UBESLUTTE

Legemiddel- og utstyrsinformasjon, studiedokumenter

Studerer et amerikansk FDA-regulert medikamentprodukt

Nei

Studerer et amerikansk FDA-regulert enhetsprodukt

Nei

Denne informasjonen ble hentet direkte fra nettstedet clinicaltrials.gov uten noen endringer. Hvis du har noen forespørsler om å endre, fjerne eller oppdatere studiedetaljene dine, vennligst kontakt register@clinicaltrials.gov. Så snart en endring er implementert på clinicaltrials.gov, vil denne også bli oppdatert automatisk på nettstedet vårt. .