Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37479341›Full record

Trial reportThe lancet. Psychiatry2023

Therapist-assisted online psychological therapies differing in trauma focus for post-traumatic stress disorder (STOP-PTSD): a UK-based, single-blind, randomised controlled trial.

Anke Ehlers, Jennifer Wild, Emma Warnock-Parkes, Nick Grey, Hannah Murray, Alice Kerr, Alexander Rozental, Graham Thew, Magdalena Janecka, Esther T Beierl and 4 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The lancet. Psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
19.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 9 institutions in 4 countries.

Anke EhlersDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK. Electronic address: anke.ehlers@psy.ox.ac.uk.
Jennifer WildDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK; Phoenix Australia Centre for Posttraumatic Mental Health, Department of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Emma Warnock-ParkesDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK; Department of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK; South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Nick GreySussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Worthing, UK.
Hannah MurrayDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Alice KerrDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK; South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Alexander RozentalDepartment of Psychology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden; Centre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Graham ThewDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Magdalena JaneckaIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York City, NY, USA.
Esther T BeierlDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Apostolos TsiachristasNuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Rafael Perera-SalazarNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Gerhard AnderssonCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning and Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
David M ClarkDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
University of Oxford · GBIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai · USKing's College London · GBLinköping University · SEOxford Health NHS Foundation Trust · GBSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust · GBSussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Melbourne · AUUppsala University · SE

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany patients are currently unable to access psychological treatments for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and it is unclear which types of therapist-assisted internet-based treatments work best. We aimed to investigate whether a novel internet-delivered cognitive therapy for PTSD (iCT-PTSD), which implements all procedures of a first-line, trauma-focused intervention recommended by the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) for PTSD, is superior to internet-delivered stress management therapy for PTSD (iStress-PTSD), a comprehensive cognitive behavioural treatment programme focusing on a wide range of coping skills.

methodsWe did a single-blind, randomised controlled trial in three locations in the UK. Participants (≥18 years) were recruited from UK National Health Service (NHS) Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) services or by self-referral and met DSM-5 criteria for PTSD to single or multiple events. Participants were randomly allocated by a computer programme (3:3:1) to iCT-PTSD, iStress-PTSD, or a 3-month waiting list with usual NHS care, after which patients who still met PTSD criteria were randomly allocated (1:1) to iCT-PTSD or iStress-PTSD. Randomisation was stratified by location, duration of PTSD (<18 months or ≥18 months), and severity of PTSD symptoms (high vs low). iCT-PTSD and iStress-PTSD were delivered online with therapist support by messages and short weekly phone calls over the first 12 weeks (weekly treatment phase), and three phone calls over the next 3 months (booster phase). The primary outcome was the severity of PTSD symptoms at 13 weeks after random assignment, measured by self-report on the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5), and analysed by intention-to-treat. Safety was assessed in all participants who started treatment. Process analyses investigated acceptability and compliance with treatment, and candidate moderators and mediators of outcome. The trial was prospectively registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN16806208.

findingsOf the 217 participants, 158 (73%) self-reported as female, 57 (26%) as male, and two (1%) as other; 170 (78%) were White British, 20 (9%) were other White, six (3%) were Asian, ten (5%) were Black, eight (4%) had a mixed ethnic background, and three (1%) had other ethnic backgrounds. Mean age was 36·36 years (SD 12·11; range 18-71 years). 52 (24%) participants met self-reported criteria for ICD-11 complex PTSD. Fewer than 10% of participants dropped out of each treatment group. iCT-PTSD was superior to iStress-PTSD in reducing PTSD symptoms, showing an adjusted difference on the PCL-5 of -4·92 (95% CI -8·92 to -0·92; p=0·016; standardised effect size d=0·38 [0·07 to 0·69]) for immediate allocations and -5·82 (-9·59 to -2·04; p=0·0027; d=0·44 [0·15 to 0·72]) for all treatment allocations. Both treatments were superior to the waiting list for PCL-5 at 13 weeks (d=1·67 [1·23 to 2·10] for iCT-PTSD and 1·29 [0·85 to 1·72] for iStress-PTSD). The advantages in outcome for iCT-PTSD were greater for participants with high dissociation or complex PTSD symptoms, and mediation analyses showed both treatments worked by changing negative meanings of the trauma, unhelpful coping, and flashback memories. No serious adverse events were reported.

interpretationTrauma-focused iCT-PTSD is effective and acceptable to patients with PTSD, and superior to a non-trauma-focused cognitive behavioural stress management therapy, suggesting that iCT-PTSD is an effective way of delivering the contents of CT-PTSD, one of the NICE-recommended first-line treatments for PTSD, while reducing therapist time compared with face-to-face therapy.

fundingWellcome Trust, UK National Institute for Health and Care Research Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyStress Disorders, Post-TraumaticAdolescentAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSingle-Blind MethodState MedicineUnited KingdomYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID37479341
PMCPMC10789612
OpenAlexW4385064764

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.