Patients’ perceptions of treatment credibility and their relation to the outcome of group CBT for depression

Söchting, Ingrid; Tsai, Michelle; Ogrodniczuk, John S.

doi:10.12740/app/66485

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the convergent validity, the association between the CEQ credibility factor and the therapeutic alliance in session 2 was not statistically significant in the present study (Marôco, 2014). However, previous research suggests that credibility and expectation are associated with the therapeutic relationship and these processes may influenced each other throughout therapy (Ametrano, 2011;Smeets et al, 2008;Sochting et al, 2016). It is possible, though, that the present results may be explained by the fact that the alliance was considered here (assessed through the WAI) during the initial sessions, when the relationship is still being established (Ardito & Rabellino, 2011).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 66%

“…Regarding discriminant validity, no significant association was found between CEQ and clinical symptoms. Prior research on this issue is not consistent; however, there are several previous studies that also did not find a correlation between the symptoms and the credibility and expectation (Devilly & Borkovec, 2000;Smeets et al, 2008;Sochting et al, 2016;Thompson-Hollands et al, 2014). Nevertheless, the absence of a significant correlation between CEQ and clinical measures targeting mental health symptoms are within the expected results of a discriminant analysis, giving further support to the use of a 5-item version in the Portuguese context.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

“…The credibility/expectancy questionnaire (CEQ) (Devilly & Borkovec, 2000) is one of the mostly used measures to assess the client's credibility and expectancy, which has shown results not only in reducing depressive, anxiety and general symptoms, but also in the increase of the therapeutic alliance in the psychotherapy (cf. Cohen, Beard, & Björgvinsson, 2015;Greenberg, Constantino, & Bruce, 2006;Newman & Fisher, 2010;Sochting, Tsai, & Ogrodniczuk, 2016;Stinson, Perez, Ohrt, Von Schell, & Bruening, 2018;Thompson-Hollands, Bentley, Gallagher, Boswell, & Barlow, 2014;Tompkins, Swift, Rousmaniere, & Whipple, 2017). It is a self-report questionnaire composed by 6 items clustered in two subscales: i) credibility; and ii) outcome expectation (Devilly & Borkovec, 2000).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Portuguese validation of the credibility/expectancy questionnaire in routine practice

Silva

Barbosa

Salgado

et al. 2021

ResPsy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to validate and explore the psychometric properties of the credibility/expectancy questionnaire (CEQ) for the Portuguese population in the context of routine practice. The sample includes 87 clients from a university psychotherapy clinic. All clients completed self-report measures to assess credibility and expectation (CEQ), as well as measures of general mental health, depressive symptoms and therapeutic alliance in session 1 and session 2. The exploratory analysis revealed the existence of two factors in CEQ for the Portuguese population, factor 1 credibility and factor 2 expectation. The measure demonstrated good internal consistency, test-retest reliability and good adjustment in the confirmatory analysis. In terms of convergent validity, no significant correlation was found between credibility and expectation and the therapeutic alliance. The results corroborate the CEQ psychometric qualities for the Portuguese population, also showing its applicability in a context of routine practice.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 66%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Portuguese validation of the credibility/expectancy questionnaire in routine practice

Silva

Barbosa

Salgado

et al. 2021

ResPsy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Others have suggested that patient-perceived treatment credibility may facilitate the formation of a stronger therapeutic alliance, which in turn predicts treatment outcomes (Söchting, Tsai, & Ogrodniczuk, 2016). Although several studies have supported the association between higher treatment credibility and more positive alliance (Horvath & Greenberg, 1989; Söchting et al, 2016; Westra, Constantino, Arkowitz, & Dozois, 2011), the one study that formally tested the full mediational pathway failed to detect an indirect effect of credibility on outcome through alliance (Söchting et al, 2016). Consequently, this particular mediational pathway requires further testing.…”

Section: Moderators and Mediatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A meta-analysis of the association between patients’ early perception of treatment credibility and their posttreatment outcomes.

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patients' perception of treatment credibility represents their belief about a treatment's personal logicality, suitability, and efficaciousness. Although long considered an important common factor bearing on clinical outcome, there have been no systematic reviews of the credibility-outcome association. The present study represents a meta-analysis of the association between patients' credibility perception and their posttreatment outcomes. To be included, articles published through August, 2017 had to (a) include a clinical sample, (b) include a therapist-delivered treatment of at least 3 sessions, (c) include a measure of patients' own early treatment credibility perception, (d) include at least 1 posttreatment mental health outcome not explicitly referenced as a follow-up occasion, and (e) report a statistical test of the credibility-outcome association. The meta-analysis was conducted on 24 independent samples (extracted from 19 references) with 1,504 patients. The overall weighted effect size was r ϭ .12, p Ͻ .001, or d ϭ .24, with high heterogeneity (I 2 ϭ 57%) and no evidence of publication bias. There were no significant moderating effects on the credibility-outcome association for any of the potential moderators that we evaluated. The meta-analytic findings are discussed in light of methodological limitations and with regard to their practice implications. Clinical Impact StatementQuestion: This article examined the association between patients' perception of treatment credibility and their outcomes after treatment ends. Findings: Patients' treatment credibility belief is an empirically supported correlate of treatment outcome that therapists would do well to assess throughout treatment, attempt to heighten at treatment's outset, attempt to responsively match to intervention style, and respond to sensitively if/when it wanes. Meaning: The treatment credibilityimprovement correlation increases the scientific credibility of formerly ill-named "nonspecific" belief factors; thus, there is sufficient information to incorporate persuasive, credibility-enhancing strategies into treatment rationale delivery, ongoing clinical exchange, and training. Next Steps: Future research needs to (a) improve credibility measurement, (b) test strategies that causally enhance patients' perceptions of treatment and therapist credibility to improve treatment efficacy, and (c) illuminate both patient and therapist contributions to such credibility beliefs to help tailor clinical practice and training.

show abstract

“…5 Failing to take this into consideration could bias the overall treatment effect estimate either up-or downwards. 6,7 Subgrouping pain patients with chronic pain such as NS CLBP is an important way to provide support for health care systems to optimize resources and costs 8 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is patient typology related to treatment outcome in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain? A pilot study.

Vossen¹,

Lindeboom²,

Kal³

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non-specific chronic low back pain (NS CLBP) affects people of all ages, is a leading contributor of disability worldwide and generates a great economic burden. Coping styles and personality traits are an important factor that should be considered when choosing a rehabilitation approach. In this study we use the MPI-subtypes of chronic pain patients who effectively can be categorized into Dysfunctional-, Adaptive Coper-, Interpersonally Distressed- and Average -types. The purpose was to investigate which of the selected MPI-subtypes have a positive or negative treatment response from a multi-disciplinary rehabilitation program, to enable us to make better and data driven decisions if special treatments is needed.In total, 110 patients started the multidisciplinary rehabilitation program and 79 patients successfully completed the entire program, whereas 31 patients dropped out.Results show that participants that are considered the “Average type” benefit more from a multidisciplinary treatment that other subtypes.We recommend to continue the search with a greater dataset for predictors to influence treatment outcomes based on the applied multidisciplinary treatment.

show abstract

Patients’ perceptions of treatment credibility and their relation to the outcome of group CBT for depression

Cited by 9 publications

References 43 publications

Portuguese validation of the credibility/expectancy questionnaire in routine practice

Portuguese validation of the credibility/expectancy questionnaire in routine practice

A meta-analysis of the association between patients’ early perception of treatment credibility and their posttreatment outcomes.

Is patient typology related to treatment outcome in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain? A pilot study.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About