Trial reportJournal of affective disorders2016
Changes in causal attributions and relationship representations: Are they specific or common mechanisms in the treatment of depression?
Trial report in Journal of affective disorders, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Change in posttraumatic stress disorder-related thoughts during treatment: Do thoughts drive change when pills are involved?Journal of traumatic stress · 2022Trial
- Breaking the vise of hopelessness: Targeting its components, antecedents, and context.International journal of cognitive therapy · 2023Article
- How Social Experiences Affect Interpretation Bias Among Individuals With Non-clinical Depression: The Role of Ostracism.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe goal of the study was to examine two central theory-driven mechanisms of change, causal attributions and relational representations, to account for symptomatic improvement in psychodynamic treatment and supportive clinical management, combined with either pharmacotherapy or placebo, in a randomized control trial (RCT) for depression.
methodWe used data from an RCT for depression, which reported non-significant differences in outcome among patients (N=149) who received supportive-expressive psychotherapy (SET), clinical management combined with pharmacotherapy (CM+MED), or clinical management with placebo pill (CM+PBO) (Barber et al., 2012). Mechanism and outcome measures were administered at intake, mid-treatment, end of treatment, and at a 4-month follow-up.
resultsImprovements in causal attributions and in relational representations were found across treatments. Changes in causal attributions did not predict subsequent symptomatic level when controlling for prior symptomatic level. In contrast, decrease in negative relational representations predicted subsequent symptom reduction across all treatments, and increase in positive relational representations predicted subsequent symptom reduction only in SET. LIMITATIONS: The study is limited by its moderate sample size. Additional studies are needed to examine the same questions using additional treatment orientations, such as cognitive treatments.
conclusionsFindings demonstrate that changes in negative relational representations may act as a common mechanism of change and precede symptom reduction across psychodynamic therapy and supportive case management combined with either pharmacotherapy or placebo, whereas an increase in positive relational representation may be a mechanism of change specific to psychodynamic therapy.
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.