Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23209672›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2012

Effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy for depression in patients receiving disability benefits: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.

Shanil Ebrahim, Luis Montoya, Wanda Truong, Sandy Hsu, Mostafa Kamal El Din, Alonso Carrasco-Labra, Jason W Busse, Stephen D Walter, Diane Heels-Ansdell, Rachel Couban and 6 more

Erratum issuedAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Shanil EbrahimDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada. shanil.ebrahim@utoronto.ca
Luis Montoya
Wanda Truong
Sandy Hsu
Mostafa Kamal El Din
Alonso Carrasco-Labra
Jason W Busse
Stephen D Walter
Diane Heels-Ansdell
Rachel Couban
Irene Patelis-Siotis
Marg Bellman
L Esther de Graaf
David J A Dozois
Peter J Bieling
Gordon H Guyatt

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo systematically summarize the randomized trial evidence regarding the relative effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) in patients with depression in receipt of disability benefits in comparison to those not receiving disability benefits. DATA SOURCES: All relevant RCTs from a database of randomized controlled and comparative studies examining the effects of psychotherapy for adult depression (http://www.evidencebasedpsychotherapies.org), electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PSYCINFO, AMED, CINAHL and CENTRAL) to June 2011, and bibliographies of all relevant articles. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS AND

interventionAdult patients with major depression, randomly assigned to CBT versus minimal/no treatment or care-as-usual. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS

methodsThree teams of reviewers, independently and in duplicate, completed title and abstract screening, full text review and data extraction. We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis to summarize data.

resultsOf 92 eligible trials, 70 provided author contact information; of these 56 (80%) were successfully contacted to establish if they captured receipt of benefits as a baseline characteristic; 8 recorded benefit status, and 3 enrolled some patients in receipt of benefits, of which 2 provided individual patient data. Including both patients receiving and not receiving disability benefits, 2 trials (227 patients) suggested a possible reduction in depression with CBT, as measured by the Beck Depression Inventory, mean difference [MD] (95% confidence interval [CI]) = -2.61 (-5.28, 0.07), p = 0.06; minimally important difference of 5. The effect appeared larger, though not significantly, in those in receipt of benefits (34 patients) versus not receiving benefits (193 patients); MD (95% CI) = -4.46 (-12.21, 3.30), p = 0.26.

conclusionsOur data does not support the hypothesis that CBT has smaller effects in depressed patients receiving disability benefits versus other patients. Given that the confidence interval is wide, a decreased effect is still possible, though if the difference exists, it is likely to be small.

Indexed as

AdultBiasCognitive Behavioral TherapyDepressionFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMaleMiddle AgedPersons with DisabilitiesPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReproducibility of ResultsRiskTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID23209672
PMCPMC3510249

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.