Behavior Therapy for Depression: A Review of Recent Developments

Rehm, Lynn P.; Kornblith, Sander J.

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-535607-7.50011-6

Cited by 30 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The role of cognitive as well as behavioral processes in mediating coexisting chronic pain and depression appears to warrant further attention in view of recent evidence supporting the use of cognitive-behavioral approaches for treating both chronic pain (Turner & Chapman, 1982) and depression (Hollon, 1981;Rehm & Kornblith, 1979). The cognitive model proposed by Beck (1967) posited that depression results from systematic negative distortions in cognitive processes, yielding a negative view of the self, the world, and the future.…”

Section: Models Of Chronic Pain and Depressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chronic pain and depression: Does the evidence support a relationship?

Romano

Turner

1985

Psychological Bulletin

698

287

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The extent to which depression and chronic pain are associated remains a controversial issue which empirical studies have failed to resolve completely. A critical evaluation of the relevant literature provides some support for an association between the two syndromes and suggests that coexisting pain and depression may be a final common presentation reached by a number of pathways. Common conceptual and methodological problems that have prevented more definitive conclusions from being drawn are discussed. Current biological and psychological models of the mechanisms by which chronic pain and depression may interact are summarized, and suggestions for future research are made.

show abstract

Section: Models Of Chronic Pain and Depressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chronic pain and depression: Does the evidence support a relationship?

Romano

Turner

1985

Psychological Bulletin

698

287

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Over the last 10 years, a large number of theoretically derived cognitive-behavioral treatment programs for depression have been developed, and their effectiveness in ameliorating depression has been tested in controlled outcome studies. Reviewers have unanimously concluded that cognitive-behavioral approaches to the treatment of depression are effective (e.g., Blaney, 1981;DeRubeis & Hollon, 1981;Hersen & Bellack, 1982;Lewinsohn & Hoberman, 1982;Rehm & Kornblith, 1979).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Group treatment of depression: Individual predictors of outcome.

Hoberman¹,

Lewinsohn²,

Tilson³

1988

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Garfield and McLean pointed to methodological issues (e.g., sample heterogeneity, dissimilar dependent variables, and incompletely specified treatments) as underlying the lack of success in distinguishing the individual characteristics related to outcome, both within and across studies.Anumberof studies have grappled with these methodological issues in their attempts to identify individual predictors of outcome after cognitive-behavioral therapy for depression (

show abstract

“…Treatments derived from cognitive positions have been aimed at depressive thought processes (e.g., Beck, Rush, Shaw, & Emery, 1979;Fuchs & Rehm, 1977), whereas those derived from behavioral positions have been aimed at the improvement of social skills (Hersen, Bellack, & Himmelhoch, 1980;Sanchez, Lewinsohn, & Larson, 1980;Zeiss, 1977), at increasing pleasant activities and time management relaxation skills (Lewinsohn, 1977), and at more general problemsolving skills (McLean & Hakstian, 1979). In spite of this diversity, empirical support for the therapeutic efficacy of each has been provided (for recent reviews see Hollon & Beck, 1978;Lewinsohn & Hoberman, 1982;Parloff, Wolfe, Hadley, & Waskow, 1978;Rehm, 1981;Rehm & Kornblith, 1979). The problem facing the practitioner at this point is one of choosing from among a range of promising conceptual formulations and therapeutic approaches.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A psychoeducational approach to the treatment of depression: Comparison of group, individual, and minimal contact procedures.

Brown

Lewinsohn²

1984

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

195

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the efficacy of a psychoeducational approach in treating unipolar depression. The vehicle of treatment was a course in "Coping with Depression." An explicit educational experience, the course addressed several specific target behaviors (social skills, thinking, pleasant activities, and relaxation) as well as more general components hypothesized to be critical to successful cognitive-behavioral therapy for depression. Sixty-three individuals who met Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC) for unipolar depression were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: class, individual tutoring, minimal contact, or delayed treatment control. Participants in the immediate treatment conditions were assessed pre-and posttreatment and at 1-and 6-month follow-up sessions; the delayed treatment group was assessed prior to and following an 8-week waiting period. Results indicated clinical improvement by all of the active treatment conditions compared to the delayed treatment condition. Differences between active treatment conditions were small, and some differences between high and low responders to treatment were found. Results are discussed in terms of their implications for future clinical use of this approach.

show abstract

Behavior Therapy for Depression: A Review of Recent Developments

Cited by 30 publications

References 55 publications

Chronic pain and depression: Does the evidence support a relationship?

Chronic pain and depression: Does the evidence support a relationship?

Group treatment of depression: Individual predictors of outcome.

A psychoeducational approach to the treatment of depression: Comparison of group, individual, and minimal contact procedures.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About