Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30088072›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience2019

It can't hurt, right? Adverse effects of psychotherapy in patients with depression.

Steffen Moritz, Yvonne Nestoriuc, Winfried Rief, Jan Philipp Klein, Lena Jelinek, Judith Peth

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Psychological interventions to foster resilience in healthcare students.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

6 authors.

Steffen MoritzDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. moritz@uke.uni-hamburg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8601-0143
Yvonne NestoriucDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Winfried RiefDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Philipps-University of Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Jan Philipp KleinDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Lübeck University, Lübeck, Germany.
Lena JelinekDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Judith PethDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite growing awareness of occasional adverse effects of psychological treatments, only a few instruments cover side effects and other unwanted effects of psychotherapy. For the present study, the Positive and Negative Effects of Psychotherapy Scale (PANEPS) was evaluated in a population of individuals with depression who had completed at least one course of face-to-face psychotherapy. A total of 135 individuals with a current or previous depressive episode as verified by a diagnostic interview filled out the online version of the PANEPS, which is designed to capture both positive and adverse events. Factor analysis yielded four dimensions: positive effects, side effects, malpractice, and unethical conduct. Internal consistency of the individual subscales was satisfactory to excellent (Cronbach's α: 0.72 and 0.92). Positive effects were reported by virtually all patients (95.6%). At the same time, approximately half of the sample noted at least one adverse event (52.6%). Among these, side effects (38.5%) and malpractice (26.7%) were significantly more prevalent than unethical conduct (8.1%). As expected, positive effects were negatively correlated with adverse events. Our results challenge the common clinical assumption that some degree of destabilization is necessary for symptom improvement. The survey was conducted anonymously, and the sample underwent diagnostic verification. The results indicate a need for improved treatment guidelines and mechanisms to monitor treatment.

Indexed as

MalpracticePsychotherapyAdultAgedDepressive DisorderFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultAdverse eventsDepressionMalpractice unethical conductPsychotherapySide effects

Identifiers

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.