ArticleBMJ open2021
Individual participant data systematic reviews with meta-analyses of psychotherapies for borderline personality disorder.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pharmacological interventions for co-occurring psychopathology in people with borderline personality disorder: secondary analysis of the Cochrane systematic review with meta-analyses.The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science · 2025Pooled it
- Which psychotherapy is most effective and acceptable in the treatment of adults with a (sub)clinical borderline personality disorder? A systematic review and network meta-analysis.Psychological medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Effects of Telerehabilitation Based on Motion Recognition Technology on Exercise Endurance of Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer After Surgery: Single-Center, Prospective, Open-Label, Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Trial
- Psychometric properties of the Spanish structured interview of personality organization revised (STIPO-R) in a clinical and community sample.Borderline personality disorder and emotion dysregulation · 2026Article
- Prediction of Non-Remission in a 5-Year Follow-Up of Borderline Personality Disorder in Adolescence.Personality and mental health · 2025Article
- Attributional style in Borderline personality disorder is associated with self-esteem and loneliness.Borderline personality disorder and emotion dysregulation · 2024Article
- Inter-Rater Reliability of the Structured Interview of DSM-IV Personality (SIDP-IV) in an Adolescent Outpatient Population.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Perspectives on Dialectical Behavior Therapy and Mentalization-Based Therapy for Borderline Personality Disorder: Same, Different, Complementary?Psychology research and behavior management · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe heterogeneity in people with borderline personality disorder (BPD) and the range of specialised psychotherapies means that people with certain BPD characteristics might benefit more or less from different types of psychotherapy. Identifying moderating characteristics of individuals is a key to refine and tailor standard treatments so they match the specificities of the individual participant. The objective of this is to improve the quality of care and the individual outcomes. We will do so by performing three systematic reviews with meta-analyses of individual participant data (IPD). The aim of these reviews is to investigate potential predictors and moderating patient characteristics on treatment outcomes for patients with BPD. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We performed comprehensive searches in 22 databases and trial registries up to October 6th 2020. These will be updated with a top-up search up until June 2021. Our primary meta-analytic method will be the one-stage random-effects approach. To identify predictors, we will use the one-stage model that accounts for interaction between covariates and treatment allocation. Heterogeneity in case-mix will be assessed with a membership model based on a multinomial logistic regression where study membership is the outcome. A random-effects meta-analysis is chosen to account for expected levels of heterogeneity. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The statistical analyses will be conducted on anonymised data that have already been approved by the respective ethical committees that originally assessed the included trials. The three IPD reviews will be published in high-impact factor journals and their results will be presented at international conferences and national seminars. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021210688.
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.