SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2020
Psychological interventions for antisocial personality disorder.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
30 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 101 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for adults with substance use disorder that have a co-occurring mental health disorder: an umbrella review and illustrative cost-effectiveness analysis.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2026Pooled it
- Transcranial magnetic stimulation in forensic populations: scoping review.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Exploring mental health professionals' emotional responses with individuals diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder or psychopathy: a scoping review.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Pooled it
- Neural correlates of aggression in personality disorders from the perspective of DSM-5 maladaptive traits: a systematic review.Translational psychiatry · 2023Pooled it
- The Relationship Between Early Maladaptive Schemas and Cluster C Personality Disorder Traits: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Current psychiatry reports · 2023Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- Impulsive Lifestyle Counselling versus treatment as usual to reduce offending in people with co-occurring antisocial personality disorder and substance use disorder: a post hoc analysis.BMC psychiatry · 2022Trial
- Prioritizing treatment targets for youths with disruptive behaviours and callous-unemotional traits: a modified Delphi study.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Genomic insights into substance use and disinhibitory disorders.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- A Latent Class Analysis of Personality Traits in Adults Experiencing Homelessness.Social work research · 2025Article
- Gender bias of antisocial and borderline personality disorders among psychiatrists.Archives of women's mental health · 2025Article
- Clinicians' Assessment of Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD): A Network Analysis Approach on DSM-5-TR Criteria and Domains.Personality and mental health · 2025Article
- Why Do They Do It? The Psychology Behind Antisocial Behavior in Children and Adolescents.Pediatric reports · 2025Review
- Decision Making, Emotion Recognition and Childhood Traumatic Experiences in Murder Convicts Imprisoned with Aggravated Life Sentence: A Prison Study.Noro psikiyatri arsivi · 2025Article
- Impact of Comorbid Personality Disorder on the Risk of Involuntary Hospitalization in Patients Referred for Urgent Forensic Assessment: A Cross-Sectional Study.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- Antisocial Behavior and Antisocial Personality Disorder Among Youth in Ethnic Minority Areas in China: A Cross-sectional Study.Alpha psychiatry · 2024Article
- Societal costs of personality disorders among treatment-seeking patients in Norway: the relative contribution of specific DSM-5 categories.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2024Article
- Antisocial personality disorder and therapeutic pessimism - how can mentalization-based treatment contribute to an increased therapeutic optimism among health professionals?Frontiers in psychology · 2024Review
- Putting the usability of wearable technology in forensic psychiatry to the test: a randomized crossover trial.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAntisocial personality disorder (AsPD) is associated with poor mental health, criminality, substance use and relationship difficulties. This review updates Gibbon 2010 (previous version of the review).
objectivesTo evaluate the potential benefits and adverse effects of psychological interventions for adults with AsPD. SEARCH
methodsWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, 13 other databases and two trials registers up to 5 September 2019. We also searched reference lists and contacted study authors to identify studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of adults, where participants with an AsPD or dissocial personality disorder diagnosis comprised at least 75% of the sample randomly allocated to receive a psychological intervention, treatment-as-usual (TAU), waiting list or no treatment. The primary outcomes were aggression, reconviction, global state/functioning, social functioning and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN
resultsThis review includes 19 studies (eight new to this update), comparing a psychological intervention against TAU (also called 'standard Maintenance'(SM) in some studies). Eight of the 18 psychological interventions reported data on our primary outcomes. Four studies focussed exclusively on participants with AsPD, and 15 on subgroups of participants with AsPD. Data were available from only 10 studies involving 605 participants. Eight studies were conducted in the UK and North America, and one each in Iran, Denmark and the Netherlands. Study duration ranged from 4 to 156 weeks (median = 26 weeks). Most participants (75%) were male; the mean age was 35.5 years. Eleven studies (58%) were funded by research councils. Risk of bias was high for 13% of criteria, unclear for 54% and low for 33%. Cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) + TAU versus TAU One study (52 participants) found no evidence of a difference between CBT + TAU and TAU for physical aggression (odds ratio (OR) 0.92, 95% CI 0.28 to 3.07; low-certainty evidence) for outpatients at 12 months post-intervention. One study (39 participants) found no evidence of a difference between CBT + TAU and TAU for social functioning (mean difference (MD) -1.60 points, 95% CI -5.21 to 2.01; very low-certainty evidence), measured by the Social Functioning Questionnaire (SFQ; range = 0-24), for outpatients at 12 months post-intervention. Impulsive lifestyle counselling (ILC) + TAU versus TAU One study (118 participants) found no evidence of a difference between ILC + TAU and TAU for trait aggression (assessed with Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire-Short Form) for outpatients at nine months (MD 0.07, CI -0.35 to 0.49; very low-certainty evidence). One study (142 participants) found no evidence of a difference between ILC + TAU and TAU alone for the adverse event of death (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.04 to 4.54; very low-certainty evidence) or incarceration (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.86; very low-certainty evidence) for outpatients between three and nine months follow-up. Contingency management (CM) + SM versus SM One study (83 participants) found evidence that, compared to SM alone, CM + SM may improve social functioning measured by family/social scores on the Addiction Severity Index (ASI; range = 0 (no problems) to 1 (severe problems); MD -0.08, 95% CI -0.14 to -0.02; low-certainty evidence) for outpatients at six months. 'Driving whilst intoxicated' programme (DWI) + incarceration versus incarceration One study (52 participants) found no evidence of a difference between DWI + incarceration and incarceration alone on reconviction rates (hazard ratio 0.56, CI -0.19 to 1.31; very low-certainty evidence) for prisoner participants at 24 months. Schema therapy (ST) versus TAU One study (30 participants in a secure psychiatric hospital, 87% had AsPD diagnosis) found no evidence of a difference between ST and TAU for the number of participants who were reconvicted (OR 2.81, 95% CI 0.11 to 74.56, P = 0.54) at three years. The same study found that ST may be more likely to improve social functioning (assessed by the mean number of days until patients gain unsupervised leave (MD -137.33, 95% CI -271.31 to -3.35) compared to TAU, and no evidence of a difference between the groups for overall adverse events, classified as the number of people experiencing a global negative outcome over a three-year period (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.08 to 2.19). The certainty of the evidence for all outcomes was very low. Social problem-solving (SPS) + psychoeducation (PE) versus TAU One study (17 participants) found no evidence of a difference between SPS + PE and TAU for participants' level of social functioning (MD -1.60 points, 95% CI -5.43 to 2.23; very low-certainty evidence) assessed with the SFQ at six months post-intervention. Dialectical behaviour therapy versus TAU One study (skewed data, 14 participants) provided very low-certainty, narrative evidence that DBT may reduce the number of self-harm days for outpatients at two months post-intervention compared to TAU. Psychosocial risk management (PSRM; 'Resettle') versus TAU One study (skewed data, 35 participants) found no evidence of a difference between PSRM and TAU for a number of officially recorded offences at one year after release from prison. It also found no evidence of difference between the PSRM and TAU for the adverse event of death during the study period (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.05 to 14.83, P = 0.94, 72 participants (90% had AsPD), 1 study, very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS'
conclusionsThere is very limited evidence available on psychological interventions for adults with AsPD. Few interventions addressed the primary outcomes of this review and, of the eight that did, only three (CM + SM, ST and DBT) showed evidence that the intervention may be more effective than the control condition. No intervention reported compelling evidence of change in antisocial behaviour. Overall, the certainty of the evidence was low or very low, meaning that we have little confidence in the effect estimates reported. The conclusions of this update have not changed from those of the original review, despite the addition of eight new studies. This highlights the ongoing need for further methodologically rigorous studies to yield further data to guide the development and application of psychological interventions for AsPD and may suggest that a new approach is required.
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.