SynthesisJournal of general internal medicine2021
Discovering Common Elements of Empirically Supported Self-Help Interventions for Depression in Primary Care: a Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Journal of general internal medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough the efficacy of self-help cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for depression has been well established, its feasibility in primary care settings is limited because of time and resource constraints. The goal of this study was to identify common elements of empirically supported (i.e., proven effective in controlled research) self-help CBTs and frameworks for effective use in practice.
methodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) for self-help CBTs for depression in primary care were systematically identified in Pubmed, PsycINFO, and CENTRAL. The distillation and matching model approach was used to abstract commonly used self-help techniques (practice elements). Study contexts associated with unique combinations of intervention elements were explored, including total human support dose (total face-to-face, telephone, and personalized email contact time recommended by the protocol), effective symptom domain (depression vs. general psychological distress), and severity of depression targeted by the study. Relative contribution to intervention success was estimated for individual elements and human support by conditional probability (CP, proportion of the number of times each element appeared in a successful intervention to the number of times it was used in the interventions identified by the review).
resultsTwenty-one interventions (12 successful) in 20 RCTs and 21 practice elements were identified. Cognitive restructuring, behavioral activation, and homework assignment were elements appearing in > 80% of successful interventions. The dose of human support was positively associated with the proportion of interventions that were successful in a significant linear fashion (CPs: interventions with no support, 0.20; 1-119 min of support, 0.60; 120 min of support, 0.83; p = 0.042). In addition, human support increased the probability of success for most of the extracted elements. Only social support activation, homework assignment, and interpersonal skills were highly successful (CPs ≥ 0.60) when minimal support was provided. DISCUSSION: These findings suggest that human support is an important component in creating an evidence-informed brief self-help program compatible with primary care settings.
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.