A Babl, J M Gómez Penedo, C Nimphy, M Keßel, C Crainic, N Boendermaker, C F Eubanks
{"title":"联盟破裂与心理治疗结果:其关联的多水平荟萃分析。","authors":"A Babl, J M Gómez Penedo, C Nimphy, M Keßel, C Crainic, N Boendermaker, C F Eubanks","doi":"10.1002/jclp.70192","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Although two meta-analyses have examined the relationship between rupture repair and treatment outcome, no meta-analysis to date has investigated the association between alliance ruptures and treatment outcome. Numerous primary studies have explored this relationship; however, the methods used to assess ruptures vary considerably. These include direct measures, such as ratings of the occurrence, frequency, or intensity of ruptures by observers, patients, or therapists, and indirect measures, such as fluctuations in alliance ratings. This methodological heterogeneity may contribute to inconsistent findings across studies. The present meta-analysis sought to clarify the association between alliance ruptures and treatment outcomes by including only studies that assessed ruptures using direct measures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, four publications remained reporting 18 effect sizes of the associations between ruptures and outcomes. Those provided data from N = 301 clients undergoing psychotherapy. Multilevel models with a three-level structure with restricted maximum likelihood to estimate the aggregated effect size of ruptures on outcome were conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results showed a significant aggregated effect size of z = -0.22, SE = 0.04, 95 CI [-0.303, -0.133]; t(17) = -5.40, p < 0.001, r = -0.21, indicating that alliance ruptures were associated with poorer therapy outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A small but consistent negative association between alliance ruptures and treatment outcomes was found. An individual patient data meta-analysis would be an important future endeavor in the field of alliance ruptures, by including more studies and a homogenous analytic approach to estimate rupture-outcome associations and including rupture-repair as a moderator.</p>","PeriodicalId":15395,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"1683-1691"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13544451/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Alliance Ruptures and Psychotherapy Outcomes: A Multilevel Meta-Analysis of Their Association.\",\"authors\":\"A Babl, J M Gómez Penedo, C Nimphy, M Keßel, C Crainic, N Boendermaker, C F Eubanks\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jclp.70192\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Although two meta-analyses have examined the relationship between rupture repair and treatment outcome, no meta-analysis to date has investigated the association between alliance ruptures and treatment outcome. Numerous primary studies have explored this relationship; however, the methods used to assess ruptures vary considerably. These include direct measures, such as ratings of the occurrence, frequency, or intensity of ruptures by observers, patients, or therapists, and indirect measures, such as fluctuations in alliance ratings. This methodological heterogeneity may contribute to inconsistent findings across studies. The present meta-analysis sought to clarify the association between alliance ruptures and treatment outcomes by including only studies that assessed ruptures using direct measures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, four publications remained reporting 18 effect sizes of the associations between ruptures and outcomes. Those provided data from N = 301 clients undergoing psychotherapy. Multilevel models with a three-level structure with restricted maximum likelihood to estimate the aggregated effect size of ruptures on outcome were conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results showed a significant aggregated effect size of z = -0.22, SE = 0.04, 95 CI [-0.303, -0.133]; t(17) = -5.40, p < 0.001, r = -0.21, indicating that alliance ruptures were associated with poorer therapy outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A small but consistent negative association between alliance ruptures and treatment outcomes was found. An individual patient data meta-analysis would be an important future endeavor in the field of alliance ruptures, by including more studies and a homogenous analytic approach to estimate rupture-outcome associations and including rupture-repair as a moderator.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15395,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Psychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1683-1691\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13544451/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.70192\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2026/7/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.70192","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/7/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:虽然有两项荟萃分析研究了破裂修复与治疗结果之间的关系,但迄今为止还没有荟萃分析研究了联盟破裂与治疗结果之间的关系。许多初步研究探讨了这种关系;然而,用于评估破裂的方法差异很大。这些措施包括直接措施,如观察员、患者或治疗师对破裂的发生、频率或强度的评级,以及间接措施,如联盟评级的波动。这种方法上的异质性可能导致研究结果不一致。本荟萃分析试图通过仅纳入使用直接测量方法评估破裂的研究来澄清联盟破裂与治疗结果之间的关系。方法:在应用纳入和排除标准后,仍有4篇出版物报道了18种破裂与结果之间关联的效应大小。这些研究提供了N = 301名接受心理治疗的患者的数据。采用具有限制最大似然的三层结构的多层模型来估计破裂对结果的综合效应大小。结果:结果显示显著的综合效应大小z = -0.22, SE = 0.04, 95 CI [-0.303, -0.133];t(17) = -5.40, p结论:发现联盟破裂与治疗结果之间存在较小但一致的负相关。个体患者数据荟萃分析将是未来联盟破裂领域的重要努力,包括更多的研究和同质分析方法来估计破裂-结果的关联,并包括破裂修复作为调节因素。
Alliance Ruptures and Psychotherapy Outcomes: A Multilevel Meta-Analysis of Their Association.
Objective: Although two meta-analyses have examined the relationship between rupture repair and treatment outcome, no meta-analysis to date has investigated the association between alliance ruptures and treatment outcome. Numerous primary studies have explored this relationship; however, the methods used to assess ruptures vary considerably. These include direct measures, such as ratings of the occurrence, frequency, or intensity of ruptures by observers, patients, or therapists, and indirect measures, such as fluctuations in alliance ratings. This methodological heterogeneity may contribute to inconsistent findings across studies. The present meta-analysis sought to clarify the association between alliance ruptures and treatment outcomes by including only studies that assessed ruptures using direct measures.
Methods: After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, four publications remained reporting 18 effect sizes of the associations between ruptures and outcomes. Those provided data from N = 301 clients undergoing psychotherapy. Multilevel models with a three-level structure with restricted maximum likelihood to estimate the aggregated effect size of ruptures on outcome were conducted.
Results: The results showed a significant aggregated effect size of z = -0.22, SE = 0.04, 95 CI [-0.303, -0.133]; t(17) = -5.40, p < 0.001, r = -0.21, indicating that alliance ruptures were associated with poorer therapy outcomes.
Conclusions: A small but consistent negative association between alliance ruptures and treatment outcomes was found. An individual patient data meta-analysis would be an important future endeavor in the field of alliance ruptures, by including more studies and a homogenous analytic approach to estimate rupture-outcome associations and including rupture-repair as a moderator.
期刊介绍:
Founded in 1945, the Journal of Clinical Psychology is a peer-reviewed forum devoted to research, assessment, and practice. Published eight times a year, the Journal includes research studies; articles on contemporary professional issues, single case research; brief reports (including dissertations in brief); notes from the field; and news and notes. In addition to papers on psychopathology, psychodiagnostics, and the psychotherapeutic process, the journal welcomes articles focusing on psychotherapy effectiveness research, psychological assessment and treatment matching, clinical outcomes, clinical health psychology, and behavioral medicine.