Literature DB >> 32361507

Is high-quality of trials associated with lower treatment efficacy? A meta-analysis on the association between study quality and effect sizes of psychological interventions for pediatric PTSD.

Thole H Hoppen1, Nexhmedin Morina2.   

Abstract

This meta-analysis aimed at providing an up-to-date estimate on the efficacy of psychological interventions for pediatric PTSD and to analyze the association between treatment efficacy and study quality. We systematically searched PsycINFO, Medline and recent meta-analyses for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RCTs were eligible if a) they included at least 10 participants per group, b) compared a psychological intervention to a control condition or another psychological intervention and c) mean age was below 19 years. Study quality was assessed independently by both authors on the basis of eight quality criteria. We explored the potential associations between study quality and effect sizes in three ways. Firstly, we compared effect-sizes of high-quality vs. lower-quality studies. Secondly, we analyzed study quality as a continuous predictor of effect sizes. And thirdly, we examined the relationship between the eight individual quality criteria and effect sizes. A total of 46 eligible RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. Psychological interventions produced a large effect size when compared to waitlist (g = 1.07, k = 23, NNT = 1.81) and a medium effect size when compared to active control conditions (g = 0.60, k = 15, NNT = 3.03) at post-treatment. Overall, study quality was moderate. Comparisons of high-quality trials (k = 16) with lower-quality trials (k = 30) produced only non-significant findings in main-analyses as well as moderator sub-analyses. Study quality as a continuous variable was also not found to be related to effect sizes in any of the main analyses, nor was any of the eight individual quality criteria. The summary of the available literature strongly suggests that psychological interventions are effective in treating PTSD in children and adolescents. No significant associations between study quality and treatment efficacy were observed.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Children and adolescents; Meta-analysis; PTSD; Pediatric PTSD; Psychological interventions; Study quality

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32361507     DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101855

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Psychol Rev        ISSN: 0272-7358


  6 in total

1.  The need for meaningful support following exposure to sexual assault.

Authors:  Jill R McTavish; Harriet L MacMillan
Journal:  Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol       Date:  2022-02-06       Impact factor: 4.328

2.  Psychological stress responses of medical staff after workplace violence: a longitudinal study.

Authors:  Hanjing Zheng; Xianfang Song; Haiyong Li; Peng Geng; Tiantian Meng; Huan Zhang; Sha Wang
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2022-08-15       Impact factor: 3.940

3.  Study quality and efficacy of psychological interventions for posttraumatic stress disorder: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Nexhmedin Morina; Thole H Hoppen; Ahlke Kip
Journal:  Psychol Med       Date:  2021-05-12       Impact factor: 7.723

4.  The Efficacy of Psychological Intervention on Body Image in Breast Cancer Patients and Survivors: A Systematic-Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Valeria Sebri; Ilaria Durosini; Stefano Triberti; Gabriella Pravettoni
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-03-01

Review 5.  A meta-analysis of dropout from evidence-based psychological treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in children and young people.

Authors:  Caroline Simmons; Richard Meiser-Stedman; Hannah Baily; Peter Beazley
Journal:  Eur J Psychotraumatol       Date:  2021-08-05

6.  DECRYPT trial: study protocol for a phase II randomised controlled trial of cognitive therapy for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in youth exposed to multiple traumatic stressors.

Authors:  Leila Allen; Polly-Anna Ashford; Ella Beeson; Sarah Byford; Jessica Chow; Tim Dalgleish; Andrea Danese; Jack Finn; Ben Goodall; Lauren Grainger; Matthew Hammond; Ayla Humphrey; Gerwyn Mahoney-Davies; Nicola Morant; Lee Shepstone; Erika Sims; Patrick Smith; Paul Stallard; Annie Swanepoel; David Trickey; Katie Trigg; Jon Wilson; Richard Meiser-Stedman
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 2.692

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.