ReviewClinical psychology in Europe2026
A Scoping Review of Amenable Patient-Specific Predictors of Treatment Failure in the Treatment of Anxiety and Depressive Disorders.
Review in Clinical psychology in Europe, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: By identifying predictors of treatment failure that are susceptible to change (amenable), we can move towards studying ways to decrease the odds of treatment failure, e.g., by targeting these predictors before treatment, adapting interventions, accordingly, choosing more suitable treatments, or preparing patients better for psychotherapy. While treatment success, within anxiety and depressive disorders, has been studied extensively, it seems that treatment failure is overlooked, even while we know that about one third of the treatment population shows no benefit in treatment. Method: In order to review the available body of knowledge concerning amenable patient-specific predictors for treatment failure, we conducted a literature search in PubMed, PsycInfo, Embase, and Medline, following the Prisma-ScR guidelines. Thirty articles met the inclusion criteria and are summarized in this review. Conclusions were drawn for scientific and clinical implications. Results: Predictors of treatment failure that are replicated or are significant in multiple studies are low treatment expectancy, high neuroticism, low use of social support, low outcome expectancy, and low perceived social support. Treatment failure is hard to define, and very few studies are replicated. There are predictors that are studied in multiple articles, but they are measured with different instruments, or in very small or specific patient samples, therefore it is difficult to compare findings from different studies. Conclusions: There are no predictors that stand out as overall strong amenable predictors of treatment failure. Possible predictors are high neuroticism, low treatment expectancies, and low use of social support. Future research should focus on replicating studies to confirm these predictors of treatment failure.
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.