Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30852694›Full record

ReviewCurrent psychiatry reports2019

Mentalization-Based Treatment for Personality Disorders: Efficacy, Effectiveness, and New Developments.

Jana Volkert, Sophie Hauschild, Svenja Taubner

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current psychiatry reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Sex differences in personality dysfunction in help-seeking adolescents.Borderline personality disorder and emotion dysregulation · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Complexity of mentalization.Frontiers in psychology · 2024
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

3 authors.

Jana VolkertInstitute for Psychosocial Prevention, University of Heidelberg, Bergheimer Str. 54, 69115, Heidelberg, Germany. jana.volkert@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
Sophie HauschildInstitute for Psychosocial Prevention, University of Heidelberg, Bergheimer Str. 54, 69115, Heidelberg, Germany.
Svenja TaubnerInstitute for Psychosocial Prevention, University of Heidelberg, Bergheimer Str. 54, 69115, Heidelberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of the reviewThis review aims to outline the most recent evidence on the efficacy and effectiveness of mentalization-based treatment (MBT) for personality disorders (PD) from 2015 to 2018 and to describe new treatment developments. RECENT

findingsSince 2015, 14 new-primarily effectiveness-MBT trials have been published. The main body of studies investigated adult populations (n = 11), patients with a borderline personality disorder (BPD) diagnosis (n = 8), and compared MBT with another psychotherapeutic treatment (n = 6). The majority of studies suggest that MBT has the potential to improve the clinical outcomes for adolescents and adults with a PD diagnosis, particularly BPD, and also with comorbid diagnoses and there are indications for changes in mentalizing being a specific mechanism of change promoted by MBT. Despite promising findings, there is an urgent need for methodological sound and sufficiently powered studies to investigate both the efficacy and effectiveness of MBT, especially beyond BPD.

Indexed as

MentalizationBorderline Personality DisorderHumansTreatment OutcomeClinical trialsMentalizingPersonality disordersReview

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.