ReviewAnnals of general psychiatry2026
The effect of metacognitive therapy on depressive symptoms from a transdiagnostic perspective: a systematic review, meta-regression and meta-analysis.
Review in Annals of general psychiatry, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMetacognitive therapy (MCT) is a modern therapeutic approach gaining wider use for psychological problems. This review evaluates the efficacy of MCT on depressive symptom severity.
methodThis review followed Cochrane and PRISMA-2020 guidelines. A comprehensive literature search revealed 51 studies on the efficacy of MCT, of which 33 were trials. A random-effects model was used to assess treatment efficacy. We calculated effect sizes using (Hedge's g) SMD for the percentage change index. (PROSPERO registration (CRD420251024202)).
resultsWithin-group aggregate effect sizes for the depression outcome measure, mean change for studies was Hedge's g = (-2.29), 95% CI (-2.75 | -1.83), (P < 0.001). Between-group analyses combined effect size for depression outcome, the mean change of aggregate effect size for the studies comparing MCT to the control group was Hedge's g =(-1.28), 95% CI (-1.71 | -0.86). Both effect sizes were highly significant (Ps < 0.000).
conclusionsFindings indicate that metacognitive therapy appears to be an efficacious intervention for depressive disorders and is superior to waitlist control conditions. However, interpretation is limited by small sample sizes and the lack of active comparison groups. Future investigations should employ larger samples and include head-to-head comparisons with other evidence-based psychotherapies.
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.