Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23039913›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2012

Predicting the outcome of a cognitive-behavioral group training for patients with unexplained physical symptoms: a one-year follow-up study.

Lyonne N L Zonneveld, Yanda R van Rood, Cornelis G Kooiman, Reinier Timman, Adriaan van 't Spijker, Jan J V Busschbach

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A Systematic Review of Personality Disorders and Health Outcomes.Canadian psychology = Psychologie canadienne · 2015
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lyonne N L ZonneveldDepartment of Medical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, 3000 CA, the Netherlands. l.zonneveld@erasmusmc.nl
Yanda R van Rood
Cornelis G Kooiman
Reinier Timman
Adriaan van 't Spijker
Jan J V Busschbach
Erasmus MC · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT) is effective for Unexplained Physical Symptoms (UPS), some therapists in clinical practice seem to believe that CBT outcome will diminish if psychiatric comorbidity is present. The result is that patients with a psychiatric comorbidity are redirected from treatment for UPS into treatment for mental health problems. To explore whether this selection and allocation are appropriate, we explored whether CBT outcomes in UPS could be predicted by variables assessed at baseline and used in routine-practice assessments.

methodsPatients (n=162) with UPS classified as undifferentiated somatoform disorder or chronic pain disorder were followed up until one year after they had attended a CBT group training. The time-points of the follow-up were at the end of CBT (immediate outcome), three months after CBT (short-term outcome), and one year after CBT (long-term outcome).CBT outcome was measured using the Physical Component Summary of the SF-36, which was the primary outcome measure in the randomized controlled trial that studied effectiveness of the CBT group training. Predictors were: 1.) psychological symptoms (global severity score of SCL-90), 2.) personality-disorder characteristics (sum of DSM-IV axis II criteria confirmed), 3.) psychiatric history (past presence of DSM-IV axis I disorders), and 4.) health-related quality of life in the mental domain (mental component summary of SF-36). The effect of this predictor set was explored using hierarchical multiple regression analyses into which these predictors had been entered simultaneously, after control for: a.) pretreatment primary outcome scores, b.) age, c.) gender, d.) marital status, and e.) employment.

resultsThe predictor set was significant only for short-term CBT outcome, where it explained 15% of the variance. A better outcome was predicted by more psychological symptoms, fewer personality-disorder characteristics, the presence of a psychiatric history, and a better quality of life in the mental domain.

conclusionsAs the predictors do not seem to predict CBT outcome consistently over time, the need for selection and allocation of patients for CBT is doubtful. It seems that this would unnecessarily deprive patients of effective treatment.

trial registrationNederlands Trial Register, NTR1609.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyPsychotherapy, GroupAdultChronic PainFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Education as TopicSomatoform DisordersTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID23039913
PMCPMC3549894
OpenAlexW2134599421

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.