Literature DB >> 20843868

A quality-based review of randomized controlled trials of psychodynamic psychotherapy.

Andrew J Gerber1, James H Kocsis, Barbara L Milrod, Steven P Roose, Jacques P Barber, Michael E Thase, Patrick Perkins, Andrew C Leon.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The Ad Hoc Subcommittee for Evaluation of the Evidence Base for Psychodynamic Psychotherapy of the APA Committee on Research on Psychiatric Treatments developed the Randomized Controlled Trial Psychotherapy Quality Rating Scale (RCT-PQRS). The authors report results from application of the RCT-PQRS to 94 randomized controlled trials of psychodynamic psycho-therapy published between 1974 and May 2010.
METHOD: Five psychotherapy researchers from a range of therapeutic orientations rated a single published paper from each study.
RESULTS: The RCT-PQRS had good interrater reliability and internal consistency. The mean total quality score was 25.1 (SD=8.8). More recent studies had higher total quality scores. Sixty-three of 103 comparisons between psychodynamic psychotherapy and a nondynamic comparator were of "adequate" quality. Of 39 comparisons of a psychodynamic treatment and an "active" comparator, six showed dynamic treatment to be superior, five showed dynamic treatment to be inferior, and 28 showed no difference (few of which were powered for equivalence). Of 24 adequate comparisons of psychodynamic psychotherapy with an "inactive" comparator, 18 found dynamic treatment to be superior.
CONCLUSIONS: Existing randomized controlled trials of psychodynamic psychotherapy are promising but mostly show superiority of psychodynamic psychotherapy to an inactive comparator. This would be sufficient to make psychodynamic psychotherapy an "empirically validated" treatment (per American Psychological Association Division 12 standards) only if further randomized controlled trials of adequate quality and sample size replicated findings of existing positive trials for specific disorders. We do not yet know what will emerge when other psychotherapies are subjected to this form of quality-based review.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20843868     DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2010.08060843

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Psychiatry        ISSN: 0002-953X            Impact factor:   18.112


  18 in total

1.  What we know, what we do not know, and where are we heading? Efficacy and acceptability of psychological interventions for depression.

Authors:  N Solomonov; J P Barber
Journal:  Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci       Date:  2015-09-28       Impact factor: 6.892

Review 2.  A comprehensive review of psychodynamic treatments for eating disorders.

Authors:  Giovanni Abbate-Daga; Enrica Marzola; Federico Amianto; Secondo Fassino
Journal:  Eat Weight Disord       Date:  2016-03-15       Impact factor: 4.652

3.  Comparative Effectiveness of Cognitive Therapy and Dynamic Psychotherapy for Major Depressive Disorder in a Community Mental Health Setting: A Randomized Clinical Noninferiority Trial.

Authors:  Mary Beth Connolly Gibbons; Robert Gallop; Donald Thompson; Debra Luther; Katherine Crits-Christoph; Julie Jacobs; Seohyun Yin; Paul Crits-Christoph
Journal:  JAMA Psychiatry       Date:  2016-09-01       Impact factor: 21.596

4.  [Differential indications for psychotherapy exemplified by depression].

Authors:  E Schramm; M Berger
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 1.214

5.  Use of psychotherapy in a representative adult community sample in São Paulo, Brazil.

Authors:  Sergio L Blay; Gerda G Fillenbaum; Paula Freitas R da Silva; Erica T Peluso
Journal:  J Nerv Ment Dis       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 2.254

6.  The quality of randomized controlled trials of psychotherapy for eating disorders.

Authors:  Renee Grenon; Alena McKenna; Hilary Maxwell; Samantha Carlucci; Agostino Brugnera; Dominique Schwartze; Nicole Hammond; Iryna Ivanova; Nancy Mcquaid; Genevieve Proulx; Giorgio A Tasca
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2018-07-20       Impact factor: 4.035

7.  THE ONGOING STRUGGLE FOR PSYCHOANALYTIC RESEARCH: SOME STEPS FORWARD.

Authors:  Fredric N Busch; Barbara L Milrod
Journal:  Psychoanal Psychother       Date:  2010-12-01

Review 8.  Inconsistency in the items included in tools used in general health research and physical therapy to evaluate the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials: a descriptive analysis.

Authors:  Susan Armijo-Olivo; Jorge Fuentes; Maria Ospina; Humam Saltaji; Lisa Hartling
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2013-09-17       Impact factor: 4.615

9.  ROAMER: roadmap for mental health research in Europe.

Authors:  Josep Maria Haro; José Luis Ayuso-Mateos; Istvan Bitter; Jacques Demotes-Mainard; Marion Leboyer; Shôn W Lewis; Donald Linszen; Mario Maj; David McDaid; Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg; Trevor W Robbins; Gunter Schumann; Graham Thornicroft; Christina Van Der Feltz-Cornelis; Jim Van Os; Kristian Wahlbeck; Hans-Ulrich Wittchen; Til Wykes; Celso Arango; Jerome Bickenbach; Matthias Brunn; Pamela Cammarata; Karine Chevreul; Sara Evans-Lacko; Carla Finocchiaro; Andrea Fiorillo; Anna K Forsman; Jean-Baptiste Hazo; Susanne Knappe; Rebecca Kuepper; Mario Luciano; Marta Miret; Carla Obradors-Tarragó; Grazia Pagano; Szilvia Papp; Tom Walker-Tilley
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 4.035

10.  Reporting clinical trials of psychosocial interventions in child and adolescent psychiatry and mental health.

Authors:  Lutz Goldbeck; Benedetto Vitiello
Journal:  Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health       Date:  2011-02-28       Impact factor: 3.033

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.