Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36373089›Full record

ArticleJournal of happiness studies2023

The Effectiveness of Positive Psychology Interventions for Promoting Well-being of Adults Experiencing Depression Compared to Other Active Psychological Treatments: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Wei Loong Lim, Stephanie Tierney

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of happiness studies, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Neurogenetics and Epigenetics of Loneliness.Psychology research and behavior management · 2023
    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

2 authors.

Wei Loong LimDepartment for Continuing Education, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2155-2440
Stephanie TierneyNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This systematic review assesses if positive psychology interventions (PPI) are more effective than other active psychological interventions for increasing the well-being of depressed adults. A review of randomised trials that compared PPI to other active interventions was conducted. A systematic search was undertaken using PsycInfo, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, two trial registries, and a manual search. The outcomes were happiness and depression. Ten studies, totalling 1341 participants, were included in the review. The small effect sizes for depression (Hedge's g = 0.15) and happiness (Hedge's g = 0.20) favoured PPI but were not significant, indicating no difference between PPI and other active interventions for the outcomes. Heterogeneity was high mainly due to differences in trial implementation. Risks of bias ranged from moderate to high. The results should be interpreted with caution because of the small number of included studies, high heterogeneity, and presence of bias. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10902-022-00598-z.

Indexed as

DepressionHappinessMeta-analysisPositive psychology interventionsSystematic reviewWell-being

Identifiers

PMID36373089
PMCPMC9638203

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.