Anxiety: what self-help approaches are supported by evidence

Updated · every claim quoted from its source

Drafted with AI, facts reviewed by Yakiv Bilenko

Short answer

Guided self-help, physical activity, breathing exercises and smartphone programmes each show significant effects on anxiety symptoms in meta-analyses; for diagnosed anxiety disorders, therapist-delivered psychological treatment shows a large effect.

What this page covers

This page summarises what systematic reviews and meta-analyses show about self-help approaches for anxiety in adults: guided self-help programmes, physical activity, breathing exercises and smartphone-delivered interventions. It describes what studies found; it is not a treatment plan, and it does not recommend starting or stopping any therapy.

Guided self-help programmes

A systematic review of 13 meta-analyses of self-help and internet-guided interventions reported medium to large effect sizes for these approaches in depression and anxiety disorders [C1]. The included meta-analyses differed in samples, types of self-help, control conditions and study design, so the size of the benefit varies. In trials that directly compared guided internet-based CBT with face-to-face CBT across psychiatric disorders, including several anxiety disorders, the two formats produced equivalent overall effects [C2], although few trials exist for each individual condition.

Physical activity

An umbrella review of systematic reviews found that physical activity had medium effects on anxiety symptoms across adult populations compared with usual care [C3]. Most of the included reviews were rated as critically low methodological quality, so the exact size of the effect is uncertain.

Breathing exercises

A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials found that breathwork interventions showed significant effect sizes for self-reported anxiety [C4]. The included studies varied and many were at risk of bias, so the evidence is promising but not yet consistent enough for strong conclusions.

Smartphone-delivered programmes

A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials found that smartphone-delivered psychological interventions produced significantly greater reductions in total anxiety scores than control conditions [C5]. Effect sizes were greater against waitlist or inactive controls than against active controls [C5]. Smartphone programmes have not been shown to match the efficacy of established treatments for anxiety.

When anxiety is a clinical disorder

For adults meeting diagnostic criteria for generalised anxiety disorder, psychotherapy — mostly cognitive behavioural therapy — showed a large effect compared with control conditions in a meta-analysis [C6]. This is the strongest evidence base among the options above, and it is delivered by trained professionals. Persistent, severe or impairing anxiety is a reason to seek assessment from a qualified clinician rather than relying on self-help alone.

Limits of this evidence

Much of the self-help, breathing and app evidence comes from trials with waitlist or usual-care controls, self-report measures and short follow-up [C1][C3][C5]. Publication bias was flagged in the clinical-anxiety meta-analysis [C6].

Self-help information does not replace a clinician; people with severe or persistent symptoms, or thoughts of self-harm, should contact a professional or local emergency services.

How certain is this?

Much of the self-help, breathing and app evidence comes from trials against waitlist or usual care, uses self-report measures and has short follow-up; effects against active treatments tend to be weaker. Most reviews in the exercise umbrella review were of critically low methodological quality, and the clinical-anxiety meta-analysis flagged possible publication bias.

Claims and evidence

  1. [C1]Context-dependent

    In a systematic review of 13 meta-analyses, self-help and internet-guided interventions showed medium to large effect sizes in depression and anxiety disorders.

    “13 meta-analyses reported medium to large effect sizes for self-help interventions.”

    [S1] · Systematic review / meta-analysis · Conflicts of interest: Not stated in abstract

    Limitation: The included meta-analyses differed in samples, type of self-help, control conditions and study design, so effect sizes vary.

  2. [C2]Context-dependent

    In trials that directly compared guided internet-based CBT with face-to-face CBT for psychiatric disorders including anxiety disorders, the two formats produced equivalent overall effects.

    “Results showed a pooled effect size (Hedges' g) at post-treatment of -0.01 (95% CI: -0.13 to 0.12), indicating that guided ICBT and face-to-face treatment produce equivalent overall effects.”

    [S2] · Systematic review / meta-analysis · Conflicts of interest: Not stated in abstract

    Limitation: Only a small number of studies were included and there are few studies for each individual condition; many conditions have not been compared directly.

  3. [C3]Context-dependent

    An umbrella review of systematic reviews found that physical activity interventions had medium effects on anxiety symptoms across adult populations, compared with usual care.

    “Physical activity had medium effects on depression (median effect size=-0.43, IQR=-0.66 to -0.27), anxiety (median effect size=-0.42, IQR=-0.66 to -0.26) and psychological distress (effect size=-0.60, 95% CI -0.78 to -0.42), compared with usual care across all populations.”

    [S3] · Systematic review / meta-analysis · Conflicts of interest: Competing interests: None declared.

    Limitation: Most included reviews had a critically low AMSTAR quality score, so the exact effect size is uncertain.

  4. [C4]Emerging

    In a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials, breathwork interventions showed significant effect sizes for self-reported anxiety.

    “Meta-analyses for secondary outcomes of self-reported/subjective anxiety (k = 20) and depressive symptoms (k = 18) showed similar significant effect sizes”

    [S4] · Systematic review / meta-analysis · Conflicts of interest: G.W.F. has trained as a Breath Teacher with The Breath-Body-Mind Foundation; remaining authors declare no conflicts of interest.

    Limitation: Heterogeneity was present and most studies were at risk of bias; the authors urge caution.

  5. [C5]Context-dependent

    In a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials, smartphone-delivered psychological interventions produced significantly greater reductions in total anxiety scores than control conditions.

    “Significantly greater reductions in total anxiety scores were observed from smartphone interventions than control conditions (g=0.325, 95% C.I.=0.17-0.48, p<0.01), with no evidence of publication bias.”

    [S5] · Systematic review / meta-analysis · Conflicts of interest: Not stated in abstract

    “Effect sizes from smartphone interventions were significantly greater when compared to waitlist/inactive controls (g=0.45, 95% C.I.=0.30-0.61, p<0.01) than active control conditions (g=0.19, 95% C.I.=0.07-0.31, p=0.003).”

    [S5] · Systematic review / meta-analysis · Conflicts of interest: Not stated in abstract

    Limitation: Effects were greater against waitlist or inactive controls than against active controls, and smartphone interventions have not been shown to match recognised treatments for anxiety.

  6. [C6]Context-dependent

    For adults meeting diagnostic criteria for generalised anxiety disorder, psychotherapy (mostly cognitive behavioural therapy) showed a large effect compared with control conditions in a meta-analysis.

    “The pooled effect of the 38 comparisons (from 28 studies) of psychotherapy versus a control group was large (g=0.84; 95% CI: 0.71-0.97) with low to moderate heterogeneity.”

    [S6] · Systematic review / meta-analysis · Conflicts of interest: Not stated in abstract

    Limitation: There were some indications of publication bias, and most studies used waiting-list control conditions.

Sources

  1. [S1] Systematic review / meta-analysis. PMID 19238128 · DOI 10.1017/s1092852900027279
  2. [S2] Systematic review / meta-analysis. PMID 25273302 · DOI 10.1002/wps.20151
  3. [S3] Systematic review / meta-analysis. PMID 36796860 · DOI 10.1136/bjsports-2022-106195
  4. [S4] Systematic review / meta-analysis. PMID 36624160 · DOI 10.1038/s41598-022-27247-y
  5. [S5] Systematic review / meta-analysis. PMID 28456072 · DOI 10.1016/j.jad.2017.04.046
  6. [S6] Systematic review / meta-analysis. PMID 24487344 · DOI 10.1016/j.cpr.2014.01.002

Educational information, not medical advice. If anxiety or low mood is severe or persistent, or you have thoughts of self-harm, contact a qualified professional or local emergency services.

More psychology topics · ONDA Science