ArticlePsychological assessment2016
The development and validation of the Memory Support Rating Scale.
Article in Psychological assessment, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cognitive Therapy-as-Usual versus Cognitive Therapy plus the Memory Support Intervention for adults with depression: 12-month outcomes and opportunities for improved efficacy in a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial.Behaviour research and therapy · 2023Trial
- Optimizing outcomes, mechanisms, and recall of Cognitive Therapy for depression: Dose of constructive memory support strategies.Behaviour research and therapy · 2023Trial
- Serial Mediators of Memory Support Strategies Used With Cognitive Therapy for Depression: Improving Outcomes Through Patient Adherence and Treatment Skills.Behavior therapy · 2023Trial
- Patient learning of treatment contents in cognitive therapy.Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry · 2018Trial
- Trial
- Patient recall of specific cognitive therapy contents predicts adherence and outcome in adults with major depressive disorder.Behaviour research and therapy · 2017Trial
- Memory support strategies and bundles: A pathway to improving cognitive therapy for depression?Journal of consulting and clinical psychology · 2017Trial
- Do improved patient recall and the provision of memory support enhance treatment adherence?Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry · 2017Trial
- Improving outcome for mental disorders by enhancing memory for treatment.Behaviour research and therapy · 2016Trial
- Maximizing benefits from evidence-based psychological treatments: Memory support and habit formation as key strategies.Behaviour research and therapy · 2025Review
- Article
- The Development and Validation of the Memory Support Treatment Provider Checklist.Behavior therapy · 2021Article
- Evaluating Augmented Depression Therapy (ADepT): study protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Patient memory for treatment information is poor, and worse memory for treatment information is associated with poorer clinical outcomes. Memory support techniques have been harnessed to improve patient memory for treatment. However, a measure of memory support used by treatment providers during sessions has yet to be established. The present study reports on the development and psychometric properties of the Memory Support Rating Scale (MSRS)-an observer-rated scale designed to measure memory support. Adults with major depressive disorder (MDD; N = 42) were randomized to either cognitive therapy plus memory support (CT + MS; n = 22) or cognitive therapy as-usual (CT-as-usual; n = 20). At posttreatment, patients freely recalled treatment points via the patient recall task. Sessions (n = 171) were coded for memory support using the MSRS, 65% of which were also assessed for the quality of cognitive therapy via the Cognitive Therapy Rating Scale (CTRS). A unidimensional scale composed of 8 items was developed using exploratory factor analysis, though a larger sample is needed to further assess the factor structure of MSRS scores. High interrater and test-retest reliabilities of MSRS scores were observed across 7 MSRS coders. MSRS scores were higher in the CT + MS condition compared with CT-as-usual, demonstrating group differentiation ability. MSRS scores were positively associated with patient recall task scores but not associated with CTRS scores, demonstrating convergent and discriminant validity, respectively. Results indicate that the MSRS yields reliable and valid scores for measuring treatment providers' use of memory support while delivering cognitive therapy. (PsycINFO Database Record
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.