| 1. |
- Cuijpers, Pim, et al.
(författare)
-
Personalized Psychotherapy for Adult Depression: A Meta-Analytic Review
- 2016
-
Ingår i: BEHAVIOR THERAPY. - : ASSOC ADV BEHAVIOR THERAPY. - 0005-7894 .- 1878-1888. ; 47:6, s. 966-980
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Personalized medicine is aimed at identifying which characteristics of an individual predict the outcome of a specific treatment, in order to get a better match between the individual and the treatment received. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing two psychotherapies directly in a group of depressed patients with a specific characteristic. We focused on the six most examined types of psychotherapy for adult depression. Our searches resulted in 41 studies with 2,741 patients who met inclusion criteria. These 41 studies examined 27 specific characteristics of patients. Power calculations indicated that we would need 4 studies for each characteristic to find a clinically relevant effect size set at g = 0.50 and 16 studies for an effect size of 0.24. Only 3 patient characteristics were found to have sufficient power and to significantly moderate treatment outcomes. Cognitive-behavioral therapy was found to be more effective than other therapies in older adults (g= 0.29), in patients with comorbid addictive disorders (g = 0.31), and in university students (g = 0.46). Risk of bias was considerable in most of the included studies. It was estimated that it will take another 326 years to have sufficient statistical power for showing an effect size of g = 0.50 of the 27 characteristics, and 1,372 years to show an effect size of 0.24. Although several dozens of studies have compared the effects of psychotherapies in specific target groups, we will need to develop more powerful alternatives to comparative outcome studies in order to identify personalized treatments for depression.
|
|
| 2. |
- de Graaff, Anne M., et al.
(författare)
-
Scalable psychological interventions for Syrian refugees in Europe and the Middle East : STRENGTHS study protocol for a prospective individual participant data meta-analysis
- 2022
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ. - 2044-6055. ; 12:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction The World Health Organization's (WHO) scalable psychological interventions, such as Problem Management Plus (PM+) and Step-by-Step (SbS) are designed to be cost-effective non-specialist delivered interventions to reduce symptoms of common mental disorders, such as anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The STRENGTHS consortium aims to evaluate the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and implementation of the individual format of PM+ and its group version (gPM+), as well as of the digital SbS intervention among Syrian refugees in seven countries in Europe and the Middle East. This is a study protocol for a prospective individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis to evaluate (1) overall effectiveness and cost-effectiveness and (2) treatment moderators of PM+, gPM+ and SbS with Syrian refugees. Methods and analysis Five pilot randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and seven fully powered RCTs conducted within STRENGTHS will be combined into one IPD meta-analytic dataset. The RCTs include Syrian refugees of 18 years and above with elevated psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10>15)) and impaired daily functioning (WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0>16)). Participants are randomised into the intervention or care as usual control group, and complete follow-up assessments at 1-week, 3-month and 12-month follow-up. Primary outcomes are symptoms of depression and anxiety (25-item Hopkins Symptom Checklist). Secondary outcomes include daily functioning (WHODAS 2.0), PTSD symptoms (PTSD Checklist for DSM-5) and self-identified problems (PSYCHLOPS). We will conduct a one-stage IPD meta-analysis using linear mixed models. Quality of evidence will be assessed using the GRADE approach, and the economic evaluation approach will be assessed using the CHEC-list. Ethics and dissemination Local ethical approval has been obtained for each RCT. This IPD meta-analysis does not require ethical approval. The results of this study will be published in international peer-reviewed journals.
|
|
