Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27717254›Full record

ArticleWorld psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA)2016

How effective are cognitive behavior therapies for major depression and anxiety disorders? A meta-analytic update of the evidence.

Pim Cuijpers, Ioana A Cristea, Eirini Karyotaki, Mirjam Reijnders, Marcus J H Huibers

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

Article in World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 204 papers, 33 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
204citing papers in PubMed, 33 pooled it
49.0field-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

204 citing papers in PubMed, 33 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 554 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

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Pim CuijpersDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ioana A CristeaDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Eirini KaryotakiDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Mirjam ReijndersDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Marcus J H HuibersDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research · NLVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLBabeș-Bolyai University · RO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We report the current best estimate of the effects of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) in the treatment of major depression (MDD), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), panic disorder (PAD) and social anxiety disorder (SAD), taking into account publication bias, the quality of trials, and the influence of waiting list control groups on the outcomes. In our meta-analyses, we included randomized trials comparing CBT with a control condition (waiting list, care-as-usual or pill placebo) in the acute treatment of MDD, GAD, PAD or SAD, diagnosed on the basis of a structured interview. We found that the overall effects in the 144 included trials (184 comparisons) for all four disorders were large, ranging from g=0.75 for MDD to g=0.80 for GAD, g=0.81 for PAD, and g=0.88 for SAD. Publication bias mostly affected the outcomes of CBT in GAD (adjusted g=0.59) and MDD (adjusted g=0.65), but not those in PAD and SAD. Only 17.4% of the included trials were considered to be high-quality, and this mostly affected the outcomes for PAD (g=0.61) and SAD (g=0.76). More than 80% of trials in anxiety disorders used waiting list control groups, and the few studies using other control groups pointed at much smaller effect sizes for CBT. We conclude that CBT is probably effective in the treatment of MDD, GAD, PAD and SAD; that the effects are large when the control condition is waiting list, but small to moderate when it is care-as-usual or pill placebo; and that, because of the small number of high-quality trials, these effects are still uncertain and should be considered with caution.

Indexed as

Cognitive behavior therapygeneralized anxiety disordermajor depressionmeta-analysispanic disorderpublication biasquality of trialssocial anxiety disorderwaiting list control groups

Identifiers

PMID27717254
PMCPMC5032489
OpenAlexW2522867222

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.