Cognitive behavioural therapy for depression, panic disorder and generalized anxiety disorder: a meta-regression of factors that may predict outcome

Abstract

Cognitive behavioural therapy is significantly less effective for severe patients and trials that compared CBT to a wait-list control group found significantly larger effect sizes than those comparing CBT to an attention placebo, but not to a pill placebo. Further research is needed to determine whether CBT is effective when provided by others than psychologists and whether it is effective for non-English-speaking patient groups.

The Effect of Cognitive Behavioral Group Therapy for Depression: A Meta‐Analysis 2000–2010

“…The finding of the result implies that CBGT are indeed beneficial for patents with depression. In terms of immediate postintervention, it was found that CBGT lowered the level of depression, which was less than the results of past meta‐analyses (Miller & Berman 1983; Scogin & McElreath 1994; Gloaguen et al 1998; Cuijpers et al 2006; Haby et al 2006; Pinquart et al 2006). These studies found the effect of therapy to be moderate or large.…”

“…There were also differences in the characteristics of subjects (Miller & Berman 1983; Scogin & McElreath 1994; Gerson et al 1999; Cuijpers et al 2006; Pinquart et al 2006; Cuijpers et al 2009), research design (Dobson 1989; Gerson et al 1999), type of therapy (Scogin & McElreath 1994; Gloaguen et al 1998; Gerson et al 1999; Cuijpers et al 2006; Haby et al 2006; Pinquart et al 2006; Cuijpers et al 2009) and research methodology (Gerson et al 1999; Parker et al 2008), which resulted in inconsistent results. During the 6‐month period after therapy, this study showed that CBGT still has a significant effect on depression, which meant that the therapy has a persistent and positive effect.…”

Dispelling Myths About Dissociative Identity Disorder Treatment: An Empirically Based Approach

“…Given that the number of dissociated self-states provides a rudimentary assessment of the degree of internal fragmentation of a given patient, it is logical that there would be a positive, significant correlation between the number of self-states experienced by patients early in treatment and length of time in treatment. Severity markers are often related to length of treatment as well as treatment response for a variety of disorders (Blom et al, 2007;Haby, Donnelly, Corry, & Vos, 2006). If Lilienfeld's logic were extended to depression, it would mean that a positive correlation between the severity of depression at baseline and length of treatment would be grounds for concluding that treatment for depression is harmful.…”

Why has our recovery rate dropped? An audit examining waiting times, starting scores and length of treatment in relation to recovery within an IAPT service

“…Many of these findings are consistent with other psychotherapy research which has examined factors in relation to outcomes for CBT interventions. In line with Gyani and colleagues (2011), there is evidence to suggest that CBT is less effective the more severe the presenting problem (Hagby et al 2006). However, where Gyani and colleagues found an effect of treatment length on recovery, a meta-analysis which synthesized data from over 33 studies, presents little evidence to suggest that the modality of treatment or length of treatment has an impact on outcome (Hagby et al 2006).…”