Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26043339›Full record

ArticleWorld psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA)2015

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for depression in children and adolescents: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Xinyu Zhou, Sarah E Hetrick, Pim Cuijpers, Bin Qin, Jürgen Barth, Craig J Whittington, David Cohen, Cinzia Del Giovane, Yiyun Liu, Kurt D Michael and 3 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 130 papers, 23 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
130citing papers in PubMed, 23 pooled it
30.3field-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

130 citing papers in PubMed, 23 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 317 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Pooled it

70 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

13 authors at 10 institutions in 8 countries.

Xinyu ZhouDepartment of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Sarah E HetrickOrygen National Centre of Excellence in Youth Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Pim CuijpersDepartment of Clinical Psychology, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Bin QinDepartment of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Jürgen BarthInstitute of Complementary and Integrative Medicine, University Hospital and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Craig J WhittingtonResearch Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK.
David CohenDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Hôpital Pitié-Salpétrière, Institut des Systèmes Intelligents et Robotiques, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, France.
Cinzia Del GiovaneDepartment of Diagnostic, Clinical and Public Health Medicine, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
Yiyun LiuDepartment of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Kurt D MichaelDepartment of Psychology, Appalachian State University, Boone, NC, USA.
Yuqing ZhangDepartment of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
John R WeiszDepartment of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Peng XieDepartment of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Chongqing Medical University · CNAppalachian State University · USFirst Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University · CNHarvard University Press · USInstitut Systèmes Intelligents et de Robotique · FRUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Melbourne · AUUniversity of Modena and Reggio Emilia · ITUniversity of Zurich · CHVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous meta-analyses of psychotherapies for child and adolescent depression were limited because of the small number of trials with direct comparisons between two treatments. A network meta-analysis, a novel approach that integrates direct and indirect evidence from randomized controlled studies, was undertaken to investigate the comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for depression in children and adolescents. Systematic searches resulted in 52 studies (total N=3805) of nine psychotherapies and four control conditions. We assessed the efficacy at post-treatment and at follow-up, as well as the acceptability (all-cause discontinuation) of psychotherapies and control conditions. At post-treatment, only interpersonal therapy (IPT) and cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) were significantly more effective than most control conditions (standardized mean differences, SMDs ranged from -0.47 to -0.96). Also, IPT and CBT were more beneficial than play therapy. Only psychodynamic therapy and play therapy were not significantly superior to waitlist. At follow-up, IPT and CBT were significantly more effective than most control conditions (SMDs ranged from -0.26 to -1.05), although only IPT retained this superiority at both short-term and long-term follow-up. In addition, IPT and CBT were more beneficial than problem-solving therapy. Waitlist was significantly inferior to other control conditions. With regard to acceptability, IPT and problem-solving therapy had significantly fewer all-cause discontinuations than cognitive therapy and CBT (ORs ranged from 0.06 to 0.33). These data suggest that IPT and CBT should be considered as the best available psychotherapies for depression in children and adolescents. However, several alternative psychotherapies are understudied in this age group. Waitlist may inflate the effect of psychotherapies, so that psychological placebo or treatment-as-usual may be preferable as a control condition in psychotherapy trials.

Indexed as

adolescentschildrencognitive-behavioral therapydepressioninterpersonal therapynetwork meta-analysisplay therapyproblem-solving therapypsychodynamic therapyPsychotherapieswaitlist

Identifiers

PMID26043339
PMCPMC4471978
OpenAlexW1869247044

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.