ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025
Meta-epidemiological assessment and evaluation of certainty of evidence in systematic reviews with meta-analyses of cognitive behavioral therapy and psychodynamic/psychoanalytic psychotherapy: an umbrella review protocol.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Psychodynamic/psychoanalytic psychotherapy (PPT) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) are two major therapeutic modalities widely used in clinical practice and supported by distinct theoretical and empirical bases. Persistent debate-particularly around PPT's evidentiary strength-underscore the need to critically appraise the methodological quality and certainty of evidence of systematic reviews with meta-analyses (SRMAs) that underpin claims regarding its effectiveness, particularly in comparison with CBT. Objective: This umbrella review will assess and compare the methodological rigor (AMSTAR-2) and certainty of evidence (GRADE) of systematic reviews with meta-analyses (SRMAs) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of CBT and PPT, published between 2015 and 2024. Methods: We will search Embase, The Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science for peer-reviewed SRMAs of RCTs of CBT and PPT across various mental disorders. Methodological quality will be assessed using AMSTAR-2, and their certainty of evidence will be evaluated using the GRADE system. Descriptive, correlational, and comparative analyses will examine associations between methodological quality, certainty of evidence, and reported SRMA-level effect patterns, and be used to synthesize the findings. Sensitivity analyses will address quality threshold, comparator class, psychiatric diagnosis, and quality thresholds; multiple testing will be corrected by Holm-Bonferroni. Discussion: By evaluating and comparing the volume, methodological rigor, and certainty of evidence of SRMAs CBT and PPT, this umbrella review aims to contribute to the ongoing debate on evidence-based psychotherapy, inform clinical decision-making, guide future research, and support evidence-informed public health policy. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO (CRD420250619644).
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.