Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37395600›Full record

Trial reportThe British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science2023

Cognitive-behavioural versus cognitive-analytic guided self-help for mild-to-moderate anxiety: a pragmatic, randomised patient preference trial.

Stephen Kellett, Charlotte Bee, Jess Smithies, Vikki Aadahl, Melanie Simmonds-Buckley, Niall Power, Caroline Dugen-Williams, Neil Fallon, Jaime Delgadillo

Erratum issued 2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialPragmatic Clinical Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT03730532 naunknown statusnot on this map

Comparing Cognitive-behavioural and Cognitive-analytic Guided Self-help for Anxiety; a Patient Preference Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of SheffieldRan2019 to 2020Enrolled134ConditionsAnxietyArmsCognitive Behavioural Therapy Guided Self Help, Cognitive Analytic Therapy Guided Self Help
NCT06806176 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Effectiveness and Acceptability of Cognitive Analytic Therapy Guided Self-help (CAT-GSH) for Anxiety and Depression for Returning Patients in NHS Talking Therapies Services

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of SheffieldRan2025 to 2025Enrolled100ConditionsAnxiety, DepressionArmsCognitive analytic therapy guided self-help (CAT-GSH), Cognitive behavioural therapy guided self-help (CBT-GSH)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Stephen KellettRotherham Doncaster and South Humber NHS Foundation Trust, UK; and University of Sheffield, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6034-4495
Charlotte BeePennine Care NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Jess SmithiesPennine Care NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Vikki AadahlPennine Care NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Melanie Simmonds-BuckleyRotherham Doncaster and South Humber NHS Foundation Trust, UK; and University of Sheffield, UK.
Niall PowerDerbyshire Community Health Services NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Caroline Dugen-WilliamsMidlands Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Neil FallonPennine Care NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Jaime DelgadilloRotherham Doncaster and South Humber NHS Foundation Trust, UK; and University of Sheffield, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGuided self-help (GSH) for anxiety is widely implemented in primary care services because of service efficiency gains, but there is also evidence of poor acceptability, low effectiveness and relapse.

aimsThe aim was to compare preferences for, acceptability and efficacy of cognitive-behavioural guided self-help (CBT-GSH) versus cognitive-analytic guided self-help (CAT-GSH).

methodThis was a pragmatic, randomised, patient preference trial (Clinical trials identifier: NCT03730532). The Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) was the primary outcome at 8- and 24-week follow-up. Interventions were delivered competently on the telephone via structured workbooks over 6-8 (30-35 min) sessions by trained practitioners.

resultsA total of 271 eligible participants were included, of whom 19 (7%) accepted being randomised and 252 (93%) chose their treatment. In the preference cohort, 181 (72%) chose CAT-GSH and 71 (28%) preferred CBT-GSH. BAI outcomes in the preference and randomised cohorts did not differ at 8 weeks (-0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.52 to 2.92) or 24 weeks (0.85, 95% CI -2.87 to 4.57). After controlling for allocation method and baseline covariates, there were no differences between CAT-GSH and CBT-GSH at 8 weeks (F(1, 263) = 0.22,

conclusionsPatients accessing routine primary care talking treatments prefer to choose the intervention they receive. CAT-GSH expands the treatment offer in primary care for patients with anxiety seeking a brief but analytically informed GSH solution.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyAnxietyCognitionCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansPatient PreferenceTreatment OutcomeAnxiety disorderscognitive–analytic therapyimproving access to psychological therapiespatient choicerandomised controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID37395600
PMCPMC10895510

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.