Computer Game Designed To Treat Depression As Effective As Traditional Treatment 190
New submitter sirlark writes "'Researchers at the University of Auckland tested an interactive 3D fantasy game called Sparx on a 94 youngsters diagnosed with depression whose average age was 15 and a half. Sparx invites a user to take on a series of seven challenges over four to seven weeks in which an avatar has to learn to deal with anger and hurt feelings and swap negative thoughts for helpful ones. Used for three months, Sparx was at least as effective as face-to-face conventional counselling, according to several depression rating scales. In addition, 44% of the Sparx group who carried out at least four of the seven challenges recovered completely. In the conventional treatment group, only 26% recovered fully.' One has to wonder if it's Sparx specifically — or gaming in general — that provides the most benefit, given that most of the symptoms of depression relate to a feeling of being unable to influence one's environment (powerlessness, helplessness, ennui, etc) and games are specifically designed to make one feel powerful but challenged (if they hit the sweet spot)."
read the original article (Score:4, Informative)
The cited article is not informative. Read the original source at http://www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e2598 [bmj.com]
It answers most of the questions in the comments.
You can view the trailer or learn more about the game as such at http://www.sparx.org.nz/ [sparx.org.nz]
Re:Lying with statistics? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Cure v. treatment (Score:5, Informative)
Some depressions can be cured immediately and permanently.
Some depression is the result of lack of vitamin D3. Spend most of your time indoors, never go out in the sunshine between 10 AM and 2 PM (the only time when you get vitamin D from sunlight), cover most of your body when you *are* out, and slather your skin with sunscreen at the beach. Oh, and the RDA was set abnormally low when it was first set. Take 8,000 IU of D3 for a week and see if you get better. You can say that it's the dead-end job, more likely it's the job keeping you indoors.
Some depression is the result of lack of iodine. Iodine is almost absent from the modern diet. Salt used in commercial products has none (iodized costs more), and bread whiteners which used to be Iodine are now mostly Bromine. The Japanese get lots of iodine in their diet and have much less incidence of depression. Take some Kelp pills for a week and see if you get better. Or, you can go to a professional and learn to manage the symptoms.
Some depression is the result of lack of Thyroid activity. No one knows what causes this (at the moment), but by some accounts 40% of depression can be cured by taking thyroid supplements. This has to be done with a doctor and lab tests, but thyroid extracts are available over the counter and could be taken for a week - see if it makes you feel better. Or, you can try the prescription "we've got it this time for sure!" antidepressant medicine that's in vogue this year.
Some depression is caused by lack of sleep, which is itself caused by allergies. Get a Xylitol nasal spray and use it every 10 minutes for an hour, or until your sinuses are clear, and see if this helps. Or change your mattress if you're waking up sore or with back pain. Or otherwise change your sleeping arrangements to maximize your rest.
Each of these is cheap and could be considered a $20 experiment - if it works, great! If it doesn't, you're out $20 so no big deal.
The "like a virus remains in your body" is fatalistic reasoning - it's an excuse to give up looking.
Another possible explanation is that Depression is a resource depletion disease, which can be cured by building up stores of that resource.
Nota Bene: There is more than one type of depression. There is more than one cause of depression.
Better links (Score:5, Informative)
I am unhappy to see such a low-quality reference for this article, when the official press release from the journal is available [bmj.com] and the full article itself [bmj.com] are available online and
Most of the objections raised in the comments above are answered in the article, which looks to me to be about as high quality as is possible given the differences between the treatments used. Making accusations of "lying" before you have read the full article is unethical.
The main weakness pointed out by the authors was that the compliance with the treatment protocols was reported by the adolescent participants, not by the machines or the professionals providing the treatment. Another was that some 13% of the participants who were supposed to receive treatment as usual were merely put on waiting lists, although that may be treatment as usual in some places; but the real kicker here was that excluding them made the treatment as usual even less effective! There have been plenty of previous studies comparing treatment with non-treatment that find treatment more effective, but testing treatments for depression is very tricky because pretty much anything is beneficial, even telling people they are taking part in an experiment and then doing nothing else, but this article reports “[w]e have carried out two small studies of computerised interventions for depressive symptoms; one showed a significant effect compared with placebo and the other was significantly more effective than a waitlist control.”
I know it is futile to ask people to read an article before they comment on it, and I know it is equally futile to ask people who submit articles such as this to post links to original articles instead of second or third sources, but here goes: If you are submitting an article about an article in a scientific journal, please include a link to the original article in the original journal instead of a newspaper article based on a press release announcing the publication of the article. Thank you. And if you are drinking from the Firehose and come across something like this, at least vote it down, and better yet, submit a better article to replace it.
On behalf of us who've suffered... piss off! (Score:5, Informative)
I've been diagnosed with recurring depression and there is quite a lot of that in my family line (father is currently medicated after years long serious depression, etc.). There have been times I've been depressed and not went for treatment and there have been times I've went to a therapist... and there is a world of difference. Of course, depression affects individuals in different ways so everything I say might not apply to everyone but I'll try to speak on a relatively general level.
First of all... "Time, improving life circumstances, and new friends are what end depression"... Those aren't the kind of things that happen during a depression! When you can't force yourself to get into the job (a job you normally love, really want to keep, etc.) in time (or at all) for months and even if you get in, you can't concentrate enough to do anything complex (e.g., coding) efficiently... When you don't feel any interest to meet friends, girlfriend, etc... there's pretty high chance of getting fired, failing your classes, destroying your relationships, etc. which will make the depression deeper. Time might take care of it but if you allow that situation to go on for months first (untreated, my depression usually lasts about 4-5 months), you've probably nearly ruined your life first (been there, done that).
So, if you're depressed, not getting treatment is usually stupid. There are always medications but studies have shown that if you treat your depression with drugs, you're likely to get depressed again sooner and the next depression is likely to be deeper... until the medicines don't have enough effect anymore.
As for what happens in therapy... I've been to quite a few sessions and I've never had to talk about my childhood and whatnot. There are quite a few schools of therapy but Freudian, Jungian, etc. exist only in movies and as fashionable things to try out for the rich people. The therapist I usually go to helps me do damage control: Helps me take the steps that prevent me from ruining my life (Talk with my boss about my need to work at a reduced capacity for a while instead of me just not showing up for work half the time, etc.) at first and then helps me claw my way out of the pit (prioritize the massive bulk of tasks that seem impossible to handle, get small successes on which to build, etc.), helps me find the things that deepen my depression and find ways to solve them (Your home is filthy? You don't think you're going to lose your job immediately? Well, get a cleaner to visit it once a week until you're up and going again!... type of practical solutions)... Nothing magic but just things that you can't get done without help if you're depressed.
Re:"as effective" doesn't mean "effective" (Score:5, Informative)
CBT -- Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is essentially mind hacking. Suppose you're afraid of snakes. In the old-style Freudian therapy you and your analyst would try to figure out how your childhood development led to that phobia. The CBT therapist isn't interested in where the phobia comes from, he's focused on how it works. He'll help you identify the unspoken assumptions and distorted thinking (that the cognitive part) that maintain your fear of snakes, then encourages you to put those ideas to the test by actually getting firsthand experience handling them (that's the behavioral part).
So the CBT approach is to break a mental problem down to its component assumptions and put each of those assumptions to an empirical test.
There's a similar therapy called "ACT" (Acceptance and Commitment Therapy). If your problem is that you think life sucks, a CBT therapist will approach that belief as a fallacy to be disproven. An ACT therapist would regard that feeling as part of the human condition that can't be banished, and focus on helping you learn to do rewarding and meaningful things despite feeling that way.