Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Research Protocols

Date Submitted: Jul 11, 2025
Date Accepted: Nov 29, 2025

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Clinical and Cost-Effectiveness of Blended Cognitive Behavioral Therapy or Psychodynamic Therapy Versus Face-to-Face Psychotherapy for Depression (BLENDED Study): Protocol for a Pragmatic, Multicenter, Assessor-Blinded Randomized Controlled Noninferiority Trial

Luyten P, Speybrouck D, Martin P, Claes S, Midgley N, van Eeren H, van Busschbach J, Tang E

Clinical and Cost-Effectiveness of Blended Cognitive Behavioral Therapy or Psychodynamic Therapy Versus Face-to-Face Psychotherapy for Depression (BLENDED Study): Protocol for a Pragmatic, Multicenter, Assessor-Blinded Randomized Controlled Noninferiority Trial

JMIR Res Protoc 2026;15:e80511

DOI: 10.2196/80511

PMID: 41533960

PMCID: 12803439

Clinical and Cost-Effectiveness of Blended Cognitive Behavioral Therapy or Psychodynamic Therapy versus Face-To-Face Psychotherapy for Depression (BLENDED Study): Protocol for a pragmatic, multicenter, assessor-blinded randomized controlled non-inferiority trial

  • Patrick Luyten; 
  • Danielle Speybrouck; 
  • Peter Martin; 
  • Stephan Claes; 
  • Nick Midgley; 
  • Hester van Eeren; 
  • Jan van Busschbach; 
  • Eileen Tang

ABSTRACT

Background:

Depression is a highly prevalent disorder. There is still a considerable treatment gap because of capacity issues across clinical services, which create barriers to access to effective psychological therapies. In addition, many individuals with depression do not seek treatment, and waiting lists for psychotherapy are typically very long. Blended psychotherapy, which combines online components and in-person sessions, may help bridge the treatment gap as a cost-effective intervention that complements other types of treatment for depression, as it may reduce therapist time and potentially lower the threshold for people to seek treatment for their depression.

Objective:

This study sets out to investigate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of blended psychodynamic therapy (PDT) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for depression compared with face-to-face (FTF) PDT and CBT from baseline to 12-month follow-up in adults diagnosed with major depressive disorder (MDD) (n=504) in a pragmatic, single-blind, multi-site, non-inferiority trial.

Methods:

Patients will also be followed up until 2 years after the end of treatment. In addition, potential moderators and mechanisms of change will be investigated. A qualitative study will explore the subjective experiences of both patients and therapists associated with blended treatment.

Results:

Inclusions started on April 1, 2019, and were seriously delayed because of COVID-19 restrictions as detailed in the Protocol Amendments section. The trial is currently still ongoing; recruitment ended on December 2, 2024, and all assessments should be completed by the end of September 2026.

Conclusions:

This trial promises to inform decisions concerning the implementation of blended versus FTF therapy for individuals with depression in routine clinical care. Clinical Trial: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04337242; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04337242


 Citation

Please cite as:

Luyten P, Speybrouck D, Martin P, Claes S, Midgley N, van Eeren H, van Busschbach J, Tang E

Clinical and Cost-Effectiveness of Blended Cognitive Behavioral Therapy or Psychodynamic Therapy Versus Face-to-Face Psychotherapy for Depression (BLENDED Study): Protocol for a Pragmatic, Multicenter, Assessor-Blinded Randomized Controlled Noninferiority Trial

JMIR Res Protoc 2026;15:e80511

DOI: 10.2196/80511

PMID: 41533960

PMCID: 12803439

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.