Trial reportJournal of clinical psychology2025
Brief Versions of the Unified Protocol for Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders in Spanish Primary Care Service: Results of a Feasibility Pilot Study.
Trial report in Journal of clinical psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06547450 (Study of the Cost-efficacy and Acceptability of the Unified Protocol for Treatment of Emotional Disorders in Brief Groups in Primary Care Services in Spain), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Study of the Cost-efficacy and Acceptability of the Unified Protocol for Treatment of Emotional Disorders in Brief Groups in Primary Care Services in Spain (PU-AP)
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
introductionIn recent years, there has been a growing interest in integrating psychological treatments in primary care (PC) for individuals with emotional disorders (EDs), as an alternative to the pharmacological treatments typically offered. Transdiagnostic interventions, such as the Unified Protocol for the Treatment of EDs (UP), in brief group format, have emerged as a viable option for treating EDs in PC services. The aim of the present study was to compare the preliminary clinical utility and feasibility (adherence, quality, usefulness, satisfaction of the intervention, among others) of the UP applied in two group formats of 5 and 8 sessions in a PC setting.
methodThe sample consisted of 43 individuals (72.1% women) with a mean age of 40.7 years (SD = 10.77) treated in PC of the Spanish public health system who had a diagnosis of EDss and who were randomized to two treatment conditions: the 8-session (n = 28) or the 5-session (n = 15) UP group. The variables assessed pre- and posttreatment and at 1-, 3- and 6-month follow-up were anxiety, depression, transdiagnostic emotional regulation dimensions, interference and quality of life.
resultsOver time, statistically significant changes were observed in all variables assessed in both conditions (except for positive temperament and social anxiety). No statistically significant differences were found between the two study conditions (except for traumatic re-experiencing, with higher scores found in the 5-session group), neither in adherence, quality, usefulness, satisfaction, or other feasibility variables, showing high scores in all of them.
conclusionThe UP in a brief and group format, whether via 5 or 8 group sessions, could be clinically useful and a feasible proposal for addressing EDs in Spanish PC settings.
trial registrationNCT06547450.
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.