| 1. |
- Haug, Thomas, et al.
(författare)
-
Self-help treatment of anxiety disorders : A meta-analysis and meta-regression of effects and potential moderators
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Clinical Psychology Review. - : Elsevier BV. - 0272-7358 .- 1873-7811. ; 32:5, s. 425-445
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Self-help treatments have the potential to increase the availability and affordability of evidence-based treatments for anxiety disorders. Although promising, previous research results are heterogeneous, indicating a need to identify factors that moderate treatment outcome. The present article reviews the literature on self-help treatment for anxiety disorders among adults, with a total sample of 56 articles with 82 comparisons. When self-help treatment was compared to wait-list or placebo, a meta-analysis indicated a moderate to large effect size (g = 0.78). When self-help treatment was compared to face-to-face treatment, results indicated a small effect that favored the latter (g = -0.20). When self-help was compared to wait-list or placebo, subgroup analyses indicated that self-help treatment format, primary anxiety diagnosis and procedures for recruitment of subjects were related to treatment outcome in bivariate analyses, but only recruitment procedures remained significant in a multiple meta-regression analysis. When self-help was compared to face-to-face treatment, a multiple meta-regression indicated that the type of comparison group, treatment format and gender were significantly related to outcome. We conclude that self-help is effective in the treatment of anxiety disorders, and should be offered as part of stepped care treatment models in community services. Implications of the results and future directions are discussed.
|
|
| 2. |
- Riise, Eili N., et al.
(författare)
-
Cognitive behavior therapy for externalizing disorders in children and adolescents in routine clinical care : A systematic review and meta-analysis
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Clinical Psychology Review. - : Elsevier BV. - 0272-7358 .- 1873-7811. ; 83
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Various Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) programs for externalizing disorders in children and adolescents are supported by a substantial body of empirical evidence. Most of the research evidence comes from efficacy studies conducted in university settings, but there is less knowledge about the effect of these treatments in routine clinical care. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to investigate the effectiveness of CBT in non-university settings for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Conduct Disorder (CD) and Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD). Embase OVID, Ovid MEDLINE and PsycINFO were systematically searched for eligible studies published up to May 2020. In total, 51 treatment effectiveness studies involving 5295 patients were included. The average within-group effect size at post-treatment was significant (g = 0.91), and there were large effect sizes for both ADHD (g = 0.80) and CD/ODD (g = 0.98). At post treatment, remission rates were 38% for ADHD and 48% for CD/ODD, and the overall attrition rate was 14%. Benchmarking against efficacy studies showed that CBT in routine clinical care yields remission rates, within-group effect sizes and attrition rates that are very similar to those found in university settings. The findings support the transportability of CBT for externalizing disorders from university settings to routine clinical care.
|
|
| 3. |
- Wergeland, Gro Janne H., et al.
(författare)
-
Cognitive behavior therapy for internalizing disorders in children and adolescents in routine clinical care : A systematic review and meta-analysis
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Clinical Psychology Review. - : Elsevier BV. - 0272-7358 .- 1873-7811. ; 83
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) has received considerable empirical support for internalizing disorders including anxiety, depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder in children and adolescents. However, there is less knowledge regarding how CBT performs when delivered in routine clinical care. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted of CBT for internalizing disorders in children and adolescents in routine clinical care. Ovid MEDLINE, Embase OVID, and PsycINFO were systematically searched for articles published until October 2019. The effectiveness of CBT, methodological quality, and moderators of treatment outcome were examined. The effects of CBT in routine clinical care were benchmarked by comparing with efficacy studies for the same disorders. Fifty-eight studies were included, comprising 4618 participants. Large effect sizes for outcome were detected at post-treatment (g = 1.28–2.54), and follow-up (g = 1.72–3.36). Remission rates across diagnoses ranged from 50.7% - 77.4% post-treatment, to 53.5% -83.3% at follow-up. Attrition rate across the disorders was 12.2%. Quality of the included studies was fair, and heterogeneity was high. Similarities between the effectiveness and efficacy studies were greater than the differences in outcome. CBT delivered in routine clinical care is efficacious in reducing internalizing disorders and symptoms. The outcomes are comparable with results obtained in efficacy studies.
|
|
| 4. |
- Öst, Lars-Göran, et al.
(författare)
-
Cognitive behavioral treatments of obsessive-compulsive disorder. A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published 1993-2014
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Clinical Psychology Review. - : Elsevier BV. - 0272-7358 .- 1873-7811. ; 40, s. 156-169
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Obsessive-compulsive disorder is ranked by the WHO as among the 10 most debilitating disorders and tends to be chronic without adequate treatment. The only psychological treatment that has been found effective is cognitive behavior therapy (CBT). This meta-analysis includes all RCTs (N = 37) of CBT for OCD using the interview-based Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale, published 1993 to 2014. The effect sizes for comparisons of CBT with waiting-list (1.31), and placebo conditions (1.33) were very large, whereas those for comparisons between individual and group treatment (0.17), and exposure and response prevention vs. cognitive therapy (0.07) were small and non-significant. CBT was significantly better than antidepressant medication (0.55), but the combination of CBT and medication was not significantly better than CBT plus placebo (0.25). The RCTs have a number of methodological problems and recommendations for improving the methodological rigor are discussed as well as clinical implications of the findings.
|
|
