Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32714216›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2020

Establishing the Feasibility of Group Metacognitive Therapy for Anxiety and Depression in Cardiac Rehabilitation: A Single-Blind Randomized Pilot Study.

Adrian Wells, David Reeves, Calvin Heal, Peter Fisher, Linda Davies, Anthony Heagerty, Patrick Doherty, Lora Capobianco

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. A framework for implementing Patient and Public Involvement in mental health research: The PATHWAY research programme benchmarked against NIHR standards.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Adrian WellsFaculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, School of Psychological Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
David ReevesNIHR School for Primary Care Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Calvin HealNIHR School for Primary Care Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Peter FisherInstitute of Psychology, Health and Society, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Linda DaviesCentre for Health Economics, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Anthony HeagertyCore Technology Facility, The University of Manchester School of Medical Sciences, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Patrick DohertyDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
Lora CapobiancoResearch and Innovation, Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom.
University of Manchester · GBGreater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBRoyal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospital NHS Trust · GBUniversity of York · GB

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-1211-20011
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnxiety and depression are common in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) patients. However, CR programs which incorporate psychological techniques achieve modest reductions in emotional distress. More efficacious interventions that can be easily integrated within services are required. A promising alternative to current psychological interventions is metacognitive therapy (MCT). The aim was to evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of delivering Group-MCT to CR patients experiencing symptoms of anxiety and depression. METHOD AND

resultsFifty-two CR patients with elevated anxiety and/or depression were recruited to a single-blind randomized feasibility trial across three UK National Health Service Trusts and randomized to usual CR or usual CR plus six weekly sessions of group-MCT. Acceptability and feasibility of adding group-MCT to CR was based on recruitment rates, withdrawal, and drop-out by the primary end-point of 4 months; number of MCT and CR sessions attended; completion of follow-up questionnaires; and ability of the outcome measures to discriminate between patients. The study was also used to re-estimate the required sample size for a full-scale trial. We also examined the extent by which non-specialists adhered to the Group-MCT protocol. Group-MCT was found to be feasible and acceptable for CR patients with anxiety and depression. Recruitment and retention of participants was high, and attendance rates at CR were similar for both groups.

conclusionThe results suggest the addition of MCT to CR did not have a negative impact on retention and support a full-scale trial of Group-MCT for cardiac patients.

Indexed as

anxietycardiac rehabilitationdepressionmental healthmetacognitive therapy

Identifiers

PMID32714216
PMCPMC7344162
OpenAlexW3039962617

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.