ArticleJournal of mood and anxiety disorders2024
Assessing in-session rumination during CBT for depression: Replication and further evaluation of an observational measure.
Article in Journal of mood and anxiety disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study sought to further evaluate an observational measure of rumination that occurs during psychotherapy (i.e., in-session rumination). Specifically, the study aimed to replicate the reliability of an observational rating procedure in new therapy sessions and a new sample, clarify the relationship between in-session rumination and depressive symptoms, and evaluate for the first time the relationship between in-session rumination and self-reported rumination. A team of trained research assistants produced observational ratings of in-session rumination occurring during video-taped sessions of CBT from two separate treatment studies. Thirty-five patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) from one study had their final session rated, and 17 patients with MDD from another study had their first session rated. Results showed that the observational ratings were reliable, and that in-session rumination generally correlated with depressive symptom severity as expected, with higher in-session rumination predicting higher depressive symptom levels both cross-sectionally and longitudinally. Preliminary evidence also found that in-session rumination correlated with self-reported rumination, and exploratory analyses provided preliminary evidence supporting the incremental validity of in-session rumination for predicting depression severity after treatment. The results indicate that in-session rumination can be reliably identified during CBT sessions and consistently predicts higher depressive severity, both of which support efforts to develop treatments that specifically target rumination.
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.