SynthesisChinese medical journal2017
Effect of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Versus Interpersonal Psychotherapy in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Synthesis in Chinese medical journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- The experience of young people receiving cognitive behavioural therapy for major depression: A qualitative study.Early intervention in psychiatry · 2023Trial
- Article
- Article
- Interpersonal Psychotherapy for Suicidal Risk: A Narrative Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.Indian journal of psychological medicine · 2025Review
- Pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy in depression - complementarity or exclusion?Postepy psychiatrii neurologii · 2024Article
- Efficacy of interpersonal psychotherapy in mainland China: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Review
- Depression and Suicidal Behaviors Among HIV-Infected Inmates in Lesotho: Prevalence, Associated Factors and a Moderated Mediation Model.AIDS and behavior · 2021Article
- Smartphone Psychological Therapy During COVID-19: A Study on the Effectiveness of Five Popular Mental Health Apps for Anxiety and Depression.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- The Neuroscience of Nonpharmacological Traditional Chinese Therapy (NTCT) for Major Depressive Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2019Review
- Comparative efficacy of cognitive behavior therapy and interpersonal therapy in the treatment of depression: A randomized controlled study.Industrial psychiatry journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPractice guidelines have recommended cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) as the treatment of choice for major depression disorder (MDD). However, whether one therapy is better than the other remains inconclusive. The aim of this study was to compare the treatment efficacy of the two treatment approaches for MDD.
methodsUsing the terms "cognitive behavior therapy or cognitive therapy or CBT or CT or cognitive behavioral therapy" and "interpersonal psychotherapy or IPT," we systematically searched PubMed, Psyclnfo and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure databases up to February 2017. The language was restricted to be English and Chinese. Therapeutic outcomes, characteristics, and research quality were then extracted and analyzed independently. In accessing the included studies, we followed the criteria suggested by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.
resultsData for 946 patients from 10 randomized controlled trials were included in the study. Methodological quality was not optimal in most trials. Meta-analysis showed a mean difference (MD) of -1.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-2.49, -0.12) (P < 0.05) in favor of CBT according to the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and however, we did not found any statistically significant difference between CBT and IPT on the Hamilton Rating Scale for depression (HRSD) (MD -0.90, 95% CI [-2.18, 0.38]). Subgroup analyses for the studies in which patients were treated only by psychotherapy (MD -1.26, 95% CI [-2.78, 0.35]) and for those which offered more sessions of therapies (MD -0.82, 95% CI [-2.23, 0.59]) showed there was no significant difference between CBT and IPT according to BDI.
conclusionsDifferences in treatment efficacy seem to vary according to different outcome measures. CBT shows an advantage over IPT for MDD according to BDI, and there is no significant difference between the two according to HRSD. These results should be interpreted with caution.
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.