The Experts below are selected from a list of 178797 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Martin Andrew - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Psychological Treatment of post traumatic stress disorder ptsd
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2007Co-Authors: Jonathan Ian Bisson, Martin AndrewAbstract:Psychological Treatment of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) This review concerns the efficacy of Psychological Treatment in the Treatment of PTSD. There is evidence that individual trauma focused cognitive-behavioural therapy (TFCBT), eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing (EMDR), stress management and group TFCBT are effective in the Treatment of PTSD. Other non-trauma focused Psychological Treatments did not reduce PTSD symptoms as significantly. There is some evidence that individual TFCBT and EMDR are superior to stress management in the Treatment of PTSD at between 2 and 5 months following Treatment, and also that TFCBT, EMDR and stress management are more effective than other therapies. There is insufficient evidence to show whether or not Psychological Treatment is harmful. Trauma focused cognitive behavioural therapy or eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing should be considered in individuals with PTSD. Psychological Treatments can reduce symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Trauma focused Treatments are more effective than non-trauma focused Treatments.
-
The Cochrane Library - Psychological Treatment of post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2005Co-Authors: Jonathan Ian Bisson, Martin AndrewAbstract:Psychological Treatment of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) This review concerns the efficacy of Psychological Treatment in the Treatment of PTSD. There is evidence that individual trauma focused cognitive-behavioural therapy (TFCBT), eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing (EMDR), stress management and group TFCBT are effective in the Treatment of PTSD. Other non-trauma focused Psychological Treatments did not reduce PTSD symptoms as significantly. There is some evidence that individual TFCBT and EMDR are superior to stress management in the Treatment of PTSD at between 2 and 5 months following Treatment, and also that TFCBT, EMDR and stress management are more effective than other therapies. There is insufficient evidence to show whether or not Psychological Treatment is harmful. Trauma focused cognitive behavioural therapy or eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing should be considered in individuals with PTSD. Psychological Treatments can reduce symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Trauma focused Treatments are more effective than non-trauma focused Treatments.
Pim Cuijpers - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
does publication bias inflate the apparent efficacy of Psychological Treatment for major depressive disorder a systematic review and meta analysis of us national institutes of health funded trials
PLOS ONE, 2015Co-Authors: Pim Cuijpers, Ellen Driessen, Steven D Hollon, Claudi L H Bockting, Erick H TurnerAbstract:Background The efficacy of antidepressant medication has been shown empirically to be overestimated due to publication bias, but this has only been inferred statistically with regard to Psychological Treatment for depression. We assessed directly the extent of study publication bias in trials examining the efficacy of Psychological Treatment for depression.
-
Psychological Treatment of anxiety in primary care: a meta-analysis
Psychological medicine, 2012Co-Authors: Wike Seekles, Pim Cuijpers, Robin Niels Kok, Aartjan T.f. Beekman, H.w.j. Van Marwijk, A. Van StratenAbstract:Background. Guidelines and mental healthcare models suggest the use of Psychological Treatment for anxiety disorders in primary care but systematic estimates of the effect sizes in primary care settings are lacking. The aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness of Psychological therapies in primary care for anxiety disorders. Method. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, Medline, PsycINFO and Pubmed databases were searched in July 2010. Manuscripts describing Psychological Treatment for anxiety disorders/increased level of anxiety symptoms in primary care were included if the research design was a randomized controlled trial (RCT) and if the Psychological Treatment was compared with a control group. Results. In total, 1343 abstracts were identified. Of these, 12 manuscripts described an RCT comparing Psychological Treatment for anxiety with a control group in primary care. The pooled standardized effect size (12 comparisons) for reduced symptoms of anxiety at post-intervention was d=0.57 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.29–0.84, p=0.00, the number needed to treat (NNT)=3.18]. Heterogeneity was significant among the studies (I 2 =58.55, Q=26.54, p
-
Psychological Treatment of depression in inpatients: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Clinical psychology review, 2011Co-Authors: Pim Cuijpers, A. Van Straten, Frans Clignet, Berno Van Meijel, Gerhard AnderssonAbstract:Research on Psychological Treatment of depression in inpatients is not conclusive, with some studies finding clear positive effects and other studies finding no significant benefit compared to usual care or structured pharmacotherapy. The results of a meta-analysis investigating how effective Psychological Treatment is for depressed inpatients are presented. A systematic search in bibliographical databases resulted in 12 studies with a total of 570 respondents. This set of studies had sufficient statistical power to detect small effect sizes. Psychological Treatments had a small (g = 0.29), but statistically significant additional effect on depression compared to usual care and structured pharmacological Treatments only. This corresponded with a numbers-needed-to-be-treated of 6.17. Heterogeneity was zero in most analyses, and not significant in all analyses. There was no indication for significant publication bias. Effects were not associated with characteristics of the population, the interventions and the design of the studies. Although the number of studies was small, and the quality of many studies was not optimal, it seems safe to conclude that Psychological Treatments have a small but robust effect on depression in depressed inpatients. More high-quality research is needed to verify these results. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
-
Psychological Treatment of depression in inpatients: A systematic review
Clinical Psychology Review, 2011Co-Authors: A. Van Straten, Pim Cuijpers, Gerhard Andersson, Frans Clignet, Berno Van MeijelAbstract:Research on Psychological Treatment of depression in inpatients is not conclusive,with some studies finding clear positive effects and other studies finding no significant benefit compared to usual care or structured pharmacotherapy. The results of a meta-analysis investigating how effective Psychological Treatment is for depressed inpatients are presented. A systematic search in bibliographical databases resulted in 12 studieswith a total of 570 respondents. This set of studies had sufficient statistical power to detect small effect sizes. Psychological Treatments had a small (g=0.29), but statistically significant additional effect on depression compared to usual care and structured pharmacological Treatments only. This corresponded with a numbersneeded- to-be-treated of 6.17. Heterogeneity was zero inmost analyses, and not significant in all analyses. There wasno indication for significant publication bias. Effectswere not associatedwith characteristics of the population, the interventions and the design of the studies. Although the number of studieswas small, and the quality ofmany studieswas not optimal, it seems safe to conclude that Psychological Treatments have a small but robust effect on depression in depressed inpatients. More high-quality research is needed to verify these results.
-
does preTreatment severity moderate the efficacy of Psychological Treatment of adult outpatient depression a meta analysis
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 2010Co-Authors: Ellen Driessen, Pim Cuijpers, Steven D Hollon, Jack DekkerAbstract:Objective: It is widely believed that Psychological Treatment has little effect on more severely depressed patients. This study assessed whether preTreatment severity moderates Psychological Treatment outcome relative to controls by means of meta-analyses. Method: We included 132 studies (10,134 participants) from a database of studies (www.evidencebasedpsychotherapies.org) in which the effects of Psychological Treatment on adult outpatients with a depressive disorder or an elevated level of depressive symptoms were compared with a control condition in a randomized controlled trial. Two raters independently extracted outcome data and rated study characteristics. We conducted metaregression analyses assessing whether mean preTreatment depression scores predicted Psychological Treatment versus control condition postTreatment effect size and subgroup analyses summarizing the results of studies reporting within-study analyses of depression severity and Psychological Treatment outcome. Results: Psychological Treatment was found to be consistently superior to control conditions (d = 0.40–0.88). We found no indication that preTreatment mean depression scores predicted Psychological Treatment versus control condition postTreatment effect size, even after adjusting for relevant study characteristics. However, among the smaller subset of studies that reported within-study severity analyses, postTreatment effect sizes were higher for high-severity patients (d = 0.63) than for low-severity patients (d = 0.22) when Psychological Treatment was efficacious relative to a more stringent control. Conclusion: Contrary to conventional wisdom, our findings suggest that when compared with control conditions, Psychological Treatment might be more efficacious for high-severity than for low-severity patients. Because the number of studies reporting within-study severity analyses is small, we recommend that future studies routinely report tests for Severity × Treatment interactions.
Mike J Crawford - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
patient experience of negative effects of Psychological Treatment results of a national survey
British Journal of Psychiatry, 2016Co-Authors: Mike J Crawford, Lavanya Thana, Lorna Farquharson, Lucy Palmer, Elizabeth Hancock, Paul Bassett, Jeremy Clarke, Glenys ParryAbstract:Background To make informed choices, patients need information about negative as well as positive effects of Treatments. There is little information about negative effects of Psychological interventions. Aims To determine the prevalence of and risk factors for perceived negative effects of Psychological Treatment for common mental disorders. Method Cross-sectional survey of people receiving Psychological Treatment from 184 services in England and Wales. Respondents were asked whether they had experienced lasting bad effects from the Treatment they received. Results Of 14 587 respondents, 763 (5.2%) reported experiencing lasting bad effects. People aged over 65 were less likely to report such effects and sexual and ethnic minorities were more likely to report them. People who were unsure what type of therapy they received were more likely to report negative effects (odds ratio (OR) = 1.51, 95% CI 1.22–1.87), and those that stated that they were given enough information about therapy before it started were less likely to report them (OR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.54–0.79). Conclusions One in 20 people responding to this survey reported lasting bad effects from Psychological Treatment. Clinicians should discuss the potential for both the positive and negative effects of therapy before it starts.
-
patient preference in Psychological Treatment and associations with self reported outcome national cross sectional survey in england and wales
BMC Psychiatry, 2016Co-Authors: Ryan Williams, Mike J Crawford, Lorna Farquharson, Lucy Palmer, Paul Bassett, Jeremy Clarke, David M ClarkAbstract:Providers of Psychological therapies are encouraged to offer patients choice about their Treatment, but there is very little information about what preferences people have or the impact that meeting these has on Treatment outcomes. Cross-sectional survey of people receiving Psychological Treatment from 184 NHS services in England and Wales. 14,587 respondents were asked about Treatment preferences and the extent to which these were met by their service. They were also asked to rate the extent to which therapy helped them cope with their difficulties. Most patients (12,549–86.0 %, 95 % CI: 85.5–86.6) expressed a preference for at least one aspect of their Treatment. Of these, 4,600 (36.7 %, 95 % CI: 35.8–37.5) had at least one preference that was not met. While most patients reported that their preference for appointment times, venue and type of Treatment were met, only 1,769 (40.5 %) of the 4,253 that had a preference for gender had it met. People who expressed a preference that was not met reported poorer outcomes than those with a preference that was met (Odds Ratios: appointment times = 0.29, venue = 0.32, Treatment type = 0.16, therapist gender = 0.32, language in which Treatment was delivered = 0.40). Most patients who took part in this survey had preferences about their Treatment. People who reported preferences that were not met were less likely to state that Treatment had helped them with their problems. Routinely assessing and meeting patient preferences may improve the outcomes of Psychological Treatment.
-
Patient preference in Psychological Treatment and associations with self-reported outcome: national cross-sectional survey in England and Wales
BMC Psychiatry, 2016Co-Authors: Ryan Williams, Lorna Farquharson, Lucy Palmer, Paul Bassett, Jeremy Clarke, David M Clark, Mike J CrawfordAbstract:Background Providers of Psychological therapies are encouraged to offer patients choice about their Treatment, but there is very little information about what preferences people have or the impact that meeting these has on Treatment outcomes. Method Cross-sectional survey of people receiving Psychological Treatment from 184 NHS services in England and Wales. 14,587 respondents were asked about Treatment preferences and the extent to which these were met by their service. They were also asked to rate the extent to which therapy helped them cope with their difficulties. Results Most patients (12,549–86.0 %, 95 % CI: 85.5–86.6) expressed a preference for at least one aspect of their Treatment. Of these, 4,600 (36.7 %, 95 % CI: 35.8–37.5) had at least one preference that was not met. While most patients reported that their preference for appointment times, venue and type of Treatment were met, only 1,769 (40.5 %) of the 4,253 that had a preference for gender had it met. People who expressed a preference that was not met reported poorer outcomes than those with a preference that was met (Odds Ratios: appointment times = 0.29, venue = 0.32, Treatment type = 0.16, therapist gender = 0.32, language in which Treatment was delivered = 0.40). Conclusions Most patients who took part in this survey had preferences about their Treatment. People who reported preferences that were not met were less likely to state that Treatment had helped them with their problems. Routinely assessing and meeting patient preferences may improve the outcomes of Psychological Treatment.
Jonathan Ian Bisson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Psychological Treatment of post traumatic stress disorder ptsd
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2007Co-Authors: Jonathan Ian Bisson, Martin AndrewAbstract:Psychological Treatment of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) This review concerns the efficacy of Psychological Treatment in the Treatment of PTSD. There is evidence that individual trauma focused cognitive-behavioural therapy (TFCBT), eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing (EMDR), stress management and group TFCBT are effective in the Treatment of PTSD. Other non-trauma focused Psychological Treatments did not reduce PTSD symptoms as significantly. There is some evidence that individual TFCBT and EMDR are superior to stress management in the Treatment of PTSD at between 2 and 5 months following Treatment, and also that TFCBT, EMDR and stress management are more effective than other therapies. There is insufficient evidence to show whether or not Psychological Treatment is harmful. Trauma focused cognitive behavioural therapy or eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing should be considered in individuals with PTSD. Psychological Treatments can reduce symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Trauma focused Treatments are more effective than non-trauma focused Treatments.
-
The Cochrane Library - Psychological Treatment of post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2005Co-Authors: Jonathan Ian Bisson, Martin AndrewAbstract:Psychological Treatment of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) This review concerns the efficacy of Psychological Treatment in the Treatment of PTSD. There is evidence that individual trauma focused cognitive-behavioural therapy (TFCBT), eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing (EMDR), stress management and group TFCBT are effective in the Treatment of PTSD. Other non-trauma focused Psychological Treatments did not reduce PTSD symptoms as significantly. There is some evidence that individual TFCBT and EMDR are superior to stress management in the Treatment of PTSD at between 2 and 5 months following Treatment, and also that TFCBT, EMDR and stress management are more effective than other therapies. There is insufficient evidence to show whether or not Psychological Treatment is harmful. Trauma focused cognitive behavioural therapy or eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing should be considered in individuals with PTSD. Psychological Treatments can reduce symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Trauma focused Treatments are more effective than non-trauma focused Treatments.
Maria Rus-calafell - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Virtual reality in the Psychological Treatment for mental health problems: An systematic review of recent evidence
Psychiatry Research, 2016Co-Authors: Lucia R Valmaggia, Leila Latif, Matthew J. Kempton, Maria Rus-calafellAbstract:The aim of this paper is to provide a review of controlled studies of the use of Virtual Reality in Psychological Treatment (VRT). Medline, PsychInfo, Embase and Web of Science were searched. Only studies comparing immersive virtual reality to a control condition were included. The search resulted in 1180 articles published between 2012 and 2015, of these, 24 were controlled studies. The reviewed studies confirm the effectiveness of VRT compared to Treatment as usual, and show similar effectiveness when VRT is compared to conventional Treatments. Current developments and future research are discussed.