Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Mental Disorders in Adults

IF 22.5 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Pim Cuijpers, Mathias Harrer, Clara Miguel, Marketa Ciharova, Davide Papola, Djordje Basic, Cristina Botella, Ioana Cristea, Nino de Ponti, Tara Donker, Ellen Driessen, Pamela Franco, Irene Gómez-Gómez, Jessica Hamblen, Noelia Jiménez-Orenga, Eirini Karyotaki, Aaron Keshen, Jake Linardon, Emma Motrico, Minoo Matbouriahi, Olga M. Panagiotopoulou, Rory A. Pfund, Constantin Yves Plessen, Heleen Riper, Paula P. Schnurr, Marit Sijbrandij, Marieke B. J. Toffolo, Lingyao Tong, Wouter van Ballegooijen, Els van der Ven, Annemieke van Straten, Yingying Wang, Toshi A. Furukawa
{"title":"Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Mental Disorders in Adults","authors":"Pim Cuijpers, Mathias Harrer, Clara Miguel, Marketa Ciharova, Davide Papola, Djordje Basic, Cristina Botella, Ioana Cristea, Nino de Ponti, Tara Donker, Ellen Driessen, Pamela Franco, Irene Gómez-Gómez, Jessica Hamblen, Noelia Jiménez-Orenga, Eirini Karyotaki, Aaron Keshen, Jake Linardon, Emma Motrico, Minoo Matbouriahi, Olga M. Panagiotopoulou, Rory A. Pfund, Constantin Yves Plessen, Heleen Riper, Paula P. Schnurr, Marit Sijbrandij, Marieke B. J. Toffolo, Lingyao Tong, Wouter van Ballegooijen, Els van der Ven, Annemieke van Straten, Yingying Wang, Toshi A. Furukawa","doi":"10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2025.0482","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ImportanceCognitive behavior therapy (CBT) is a first-line treatment for most mental disorders. However, no meta-analytic study has yet integrated the results of randomized clinical trials on CBT across different disorders, using uniform methodologies and providing a complete overview of the field.ObjectiveTo examine the effect sizes of CBT for 4 anxiety disorders, 2 eating disorders, major depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and psychotic and bipolar disorders on symptoms of the respective disorders using uniform methodologies for data extraction, risk of bias (RoB) assessment, and meta-analytic techniques.Data SourcesMajor bibliographical databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase for all disorders) were searched up to January 1, 2024, for each disorder separately. Data analysis was performed from August 2024 to January 2025.Study SelectionRandomized clinical trials comparing CBT with inactive control conditions in adults with 1 of the mental disorders established through a clinical interview were included.Data Extraction and SynthesisBasic characteristics of patients, CBT, and studies were extracted. RoB was assessed with the Cochrane RoB tool 2. Meta-analyses were conducted using random-effects models.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was the standardized mean difference (Hedges <jats:italic>g</jats:italic>) indicating the difference between CBT and controls at posttreatment on symptoms of the respective disorders.ResultsA total of 375 trials (423 comparisons) between CBT and controls were included among 32 968 patients. The overall mean (SD) patient age was 43.4 (13.7) years, and the mean (SD) proportion of women was 0.68 (0.24). Effect sizes for CBT compared to all control conditions (<jats:italic>g</jats:italic>) were lower than 0.5 for bipolar and psychotic disorder; between 0.5 and 1.0 for panic, social anxiety, and generalized anxiety disorders, bulimia nervosa, binge eating disorders, depression, and OCD; and larger than 1.0 for PTSD and specific phobias (range of effect sizes: 0.31 for bipolar disorder to 1.27 for PTSD). Large effect sizes (<jats:italic>g</jats:italic> &amp;amp;gt; 0.94) were observed in waitlist-controlled trials, a control condition mostly used in anxiety and eating disorders, PTSD, and OCD. Trials using care as usual showed more modest effect sizes (0.22-1.13). Study dropout rates within the CBT conditions ranged from 8% for specific phobia to 24% for PTSD.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this unified series of meta-analyses, CBT was probably effective in the treatment of mental disorders, including major depression, anxiety disorders, PTSD, OCD, and eating disorders, and possibly effective in psychotic and bipolar disorders. However, the effect sizes depended on the type of control condition.","PeriodicalId":14800,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Psychiatry","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":22.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2025.0482","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ImportanceCognitive behavior therapy (CBT) is a first-line treatment for most mental disorders. However, no meta-analytic study has yet integrated the results of randomized clinical trials on CBT across different disorders, using uniform methodologies and providing a complete overview of the field.ObjectiveTo examine the effect sizes of CBT for 4 anxiety disorders, 2 eating disorders, major depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and psychotic and bipolar disorders on symptoms of the respective disorders using uniform methodologies for data extraction, risk of bias (RoB) assessment, and meta-analytic techniques.Data SourcesMajor bibliographical databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase for all disorders) were searched up to January 1, 2024, for each disorder separately. Data analysis was performed from August 2024 to January 2025.Study SelectionRandomized clinical trials comparing CBT with inactive control conditions in adults with 1 of the mental disorders established through a clinical interview were included.Data Extraction and SynthesisBasic characteristics of patients, CBT, and studies were extracted. RoB was assessed with the Cochrane RoB tool 2. Meta-analyses were conducted using random-effects models.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was the standardized mean difference (Hedges g) indicating the difference between CBT and controls at posttreatment on symptoms of the respective disorders.ResultsA total of 375 trials (423 comparisons) between CBT and controls were included among 32 968 patients. The overall mean (SD) patient age was 43.4 (13.7) years, and the mean (SD) proportion of women was 0.68 (0.24). Effect sizes for CBT compared to all control conditions (g) were lower than 0.5 for bipolar and psychotic disorder; between 0.5 and 1.0 for panic, social anxiety, and generalized anxiety disorders, bulimia nervosa, binge eating disorders, depression, and OCD; and larger than 1.0 for PTSD and specific phobias (range of effect sizes: 0.31 for bipolar disorder to 1.27 for PTSD). Large effect sizes (g &amp;gt; 0.94) were observed in waitlist-controlled trials, a control condition mostly used in anxiety and eating disorders, PTSD, and OCD. Trials using care as usual showed more modest effect sizes (0.22-1.13). Study dropout rates within the CBT conditions ranged from 8% for specific phobia to 24% for PTSD.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this unified series of meta-analyses, CBT was probably effective in the treatment of mental disorders, including major depression, anxiety disorders, PTSD, OCD, and eating disorders, and possibly effective in psychotic and bipolar disorders. However, the effect sizes depended on the type of control condition.
成人精神障碍的认知行为治疗
认知行为疗法(CBT)是大多数精神障碍的一线治疗方法。然而,目前还没有荟萃分析研究整合不同疾病的CBT随机临床试验结果,使用统一的方法并提供该领域的完整概述。目的采用统一的数据提取方法、偏倚风险(RoB)评估和荟萃分析技术,研究CBT治疗4种焦虑症、2种进食障碍、重度抑郁症、强迫症、创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)以及精神病和双相情感障碍对各自疾病症状的影响大小。数据来源主要书目数据库(PubMed, PsycINFO和Embase)分别检索到2024年1月1日为止的每种疾病。数据分析时间为2024年8月至2025年1月。研究选择包括比较CBT与非活动对照条件的随机临床试验,这些试验是通过临床访谈确定的有1种精神障碍的成年人。数据提取与综合提取患者、CBT和研究的基本特征。使用Cochrane RoB工具评估RoB。采用随机效应模型进行meta分析。主要结局和测量主要结局是标准化平均差异(Hedges g),表明CBT和对照组在各自疾病症状治疗后的差异。结果共纳入375项试验(423项比较),共纳入32 968例患者。患者总平均(SD)年龄为43.4(13.7)岁,女性平均(SD)比例为0.68(0.24)岁。与所有对照条件相比,CBT的效应量(g)在双相情感障碍和精神障碍中低于0.5;惊恐、社交焦虑、广泛性焦虑症、神经性贪食症、暴食症、抑郁症和强迫症在0.5 - 1.0之间;PTSD和特定恐惧症大于1.0(效应值范围:双相情感障碍为0.31,PTSD为1.27)。效应量大(g &gt;在候补对照试验中观察到0.94),这是一种主要用于焦虑和饮食失调、创伤后应激障碍和强迫症的对照条件。使用常规护理的试验显示出更适度的效应值(0.22-1.13)。在CBT条件下,研究退出率从特定恐惧症的8%到创伤后应激障碍的24%不等。结论和相关性在这一系列统一的荟萃分析中,CBT可能对治疗精神障碍有效,包括重度抑郁症、焦虑症、创伤后应激障碍、强迫症和饮食失调,并可能对精神病和双相情感障碍有效。然而,效应大小取决于控制条件的类型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JAMA Psychiatry
JAMA Psychiatry PSYCHIATRY-
CiteScore
30.60
自引率
1.90%
发文量
233
期刊介绍: JAMA Psychiatry is a global, peer-reviewed journal catering to clinicians, scholars, and research scientists in psychiatry, mental health, behavioral science, and related fields. The Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry originated in 1919, splitting into two journals in 1959: Archives of Neurology and Archives of General Psychiatry. In 2013, these evolved into JAMA Neurology and JAMA Psychiatry, respectively. JAMA Psychiatry is affiliated with the JAMA Network, a group of peer-reviewed medical and specialty publications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信