Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11099284›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2000

Randomised controlled trial of non-directive counselling, cognitive-behaviour therapy, and usual general practitioner care for patients with depression. I: clinical effectiveness.

E Ward, M King, M Lloyd, P Bower, B Sibbald, S Farrelly, M Gabbay, N Tarrier, J Addington-Hall

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 12 pooled it
19.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

51 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 245 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Guideline
  6. Brief psychotherapy for depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of psychiatry in medicine · 2012
    Pooled it
  7. Counselling for mental health and psychosocial problems in primary care.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Primary care mental health workers: models of working and evidence of effectiveness.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002
    Pooled it
  12. The clinical and cost-effectiveness of self-help treatments for anxiety and depressive disorders in primary care: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2001
    Pooled it
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

E WardDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioural Sciences, Royal Free and University College Medical School, University College London, London NW3 2PF, UK.
M King
M Lloyd
P Bower
B Sibbald
S Farrelly
M Gabbay
N Tarrier
J Addington-Hall
The Royal Free Hospital · GBUniversity of Manchester · GBKing's College School · GBUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the clinical effectiveness of general practitioner care and two general practice based psychological therapies for depressed patients.

designProspective, controlled trial with randomised and patient preference allocation arms.

settingGeneral practices in London and greater Manchester.

participants464 of 627 patients presenting with depression or mixed anxiety and depression were suitable for inclusion.

interventionsUsual general practitioner care or up to 12 sessions of non-directive counselling or cognitive-behaviour therapy provided by therapists.

main outcome measuresBeck depression inventory scores, other psychiatric symptoms, social functioning, and satisfaction with treatment measured at baseline and at 4 and 12 months.

results197 patients were randomly assigned to treatment, 137 chose their treatment, and 130 were randomised only between the two psychological therapies. All groups improved significantly over time. At four months, patients randomised to non-directive counselling or cognitive-behaviour therapy improved more in terms of the Beck depression inventory (mean (SD) scores 12.9 (9.3) and 14.3 (10.8) respectively) than those randomised to usual general practitioner care (18.3 (12.4)). However, there was no significant difference between the two therapies. There were no significant differences between the three treatment groups at 12 months (Beck depression scores 11.8 (9.6), 11.4 (10.8), and 12.1 (10.3) for non-directive counselling, cognitive-behaviour therapy, and general practitioner care).

conclusionsPsychological therapy was a more effective treatment for depression than usual general practitioner care in the short term, but after one year there was no difference in outcome.

Indexed as

Family PracticeAdultAnxiety DisordersCognitive Behavioral TherapyDepressive DisorderEnglandFemaleHumansMalePatient SatisfactionProspective StudiesSocial ClassTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID11099284
PMCPMC27542
OpenAlexW4231337811

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.