Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

The sleeper effect between psychotherapy orientations: a strategic argument of sustainability of treatment effects at follow-up


Flückiger, Christoph; Del Re, A C (2017). The sleeper effect between psychotherapy orientations: a strategic argument of sustainability of treatment effects at follow-up. Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences:14-32.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Three recent meta-analyses have made the claim, albeit with some caveats, that cognitive-behavioral treatments (CBT) are superior to other psychotherapies, in general or for specific disorders (e.g., social phobia).

METHOD: The purpose of the present article was to examine four issues in meta-analysis that mitigate claims of CBT superiority: (a) effect size, power, and statistical significance, (b) focusing on disorder-specific symptom measures and ignoring other important indicators of psychological functioning, (c) problems inherent in classifying treatments provided in primary studies into classes of treatments, and (d) the inclusion of problematic trials, which biases the results, and the exclusion of trials that fail to find differences among treatments.

RESULTS: When these issues are examined, the effects demonstrating the superiority of CBT are small, nonsignificant for the most part, limited to targeted symptoms, or are due to flawed primary studies.

CONCLUSION: Meta-analytic evidence for the superiority of CBT in the three meta-analysis are nonexistent or weak

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Three recent meta-analyses have made the claim, albeit with some caveats, that cognitive-behavioral treatments (CBT) are superior to other psychotherapies, in general or for specific disorders (e.g., social phobia).

METHOD: The purpose of the present article was to examine four issues in meta-analysis that mitigate claims of CBT superiority: (a) effect size, power, and statistical significance, (b) focusing on disorder-specific symptom measures and ignoring other important indicators of psychological functioning, (c) problems inherent in classifying treatments provided in primary studies into classes of treatments, and (d) the inclusion of problematic trials, which biases the results, and the exclusion of trials that fail to find differences among treatments.

RESULTS: When these issues are examined, the effects demonstrating the superiority of CBT are small, nonsignificant for the most part, limited to targeted symptoms, or are due to flawed primary studies.

CONCLUSION: Meta-analytic evidence for the superiority of CBT in the three meta-analysis are nonexistent or weak

Statistics

Citations

Altmetrics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:06 Faculty of Arts > Institute of Psychology
Dewey Decimal Classification:150 Psychology
Language:English
Date:January 2017
Deposited On:06 Mar 2017 11:58
Last Modified:07 Mar 2017 08:48
Publisher:Cambridge University Press
ISSN:2045-7960
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045796016000780
PubMed ID:27790967

Download

Full text not available from this repository.
View at publisher