Explore the vast range of titles available.

Abstract Perinatal depression is an important public health problem. Psychological interventions play an essential role in the treatment of depression. In the current paper, we will present the results of a series of meta-analyses on psychological treatments of perinatal depression. We report the results of a series of meta-analyses on psychological treatments of depression, including perinatal depression. The meta-analyses are based on a database of randomized trials on psychotherapies for depression that has been systematically developed and updated every year. Psychological interventions are effective in the treatment of perinatal depression with a moderate effect size of g = 0.67, corresponding with a NNT of about 4. These effects were still significant at 12 months after the start of the treatment. These interventions also have significant effects on social support, anxiety, functional impairment, parental stress, and marital stress. Possibly the effects are overestimated because of the use of waiting list control groups, the low quality of the majority of trials and publication bias. Research on psychotherapies for depression in general has shown that there are no significant differences between the major types of therapy, except for non-directive counseling that may have somewhat smaller effects. CBT can also be delivered in individual, group, telephone, and guided self-help format. Interventions in subthreshold depression are also effective and may prevent the onset of a full-blown depressive disorder, while therapies may be less effective in chronic depression. Psychological interventions are effective and deserve their place as first-line treatment of perinatal depression.

Depression is a prevalent and impairing condition. Behavioral activation (BA) is a parsimonious, cost-effective, and easily disseminated psychological intervention for depression. The current meta-analysis expands on the existing literature supporting the efficacy of BA for depression by examining the effects of BA on additional relevant outcomes for patients with depression, namely the reduction in anxiety symptoms and increase in activation. Randomized controlled trials of BA for depression compared to active and inactive control were identified via a systematic review. Effect sizes using Hedges's g were calculated for each outcome compared to both active and inactive control using random effects models. Subgroup analyses were used to examine the inclusion of a discussion of values as a moderator of depression symptom outcome in BA. Twenty-eight studies were included. Meta-analyses of symptom change between groups from baseline-to-post intervention indicated that BA outperformed inactive control conditions for improvements in depression (g = 0.83), anxiety (g = 0.37), and activation (g = 0.64). The difference between BA and active control conditions was not significant for improvements in depression (g = 0.15), anxiety (g = 0.03), and activation (g = 0.04). There was no evidence for a discussion of values augmenting BA efficacy. Study quality was generally low, and there was evidence of publication bias. In addition to improving depression, BA shows efficacy for reducing symptoms of anxiety and increasing activation. BA may not offer better outcomes relative to other active interventions. There is room for improvement in the quality of research in this area.

In the past 10 years an increasing number of randomised trials have examined the effects of transdiagnostic treatments of patients with depression or anxiety. We conducted the first comprehensive meta-analysis of the outcomes of this emerging field. We used the searches in PubMed, PsychINFO, Embase and the Cochrane library of an existing database of randomised trials of psychological interventions for depression to identify studies comparing a transdiagnostic treatment of patients with depression or anxiety with a control group (deadline 1 January 2022). We conducted random-effects meta-analyses and examined the effects on depression and anxiety at the short and longer term. We included 45 randomised controlled trials with 51 comparisons between a psychotherapy and a control group and 5530 participants. Thirty-five (78%) studies were conducted in the last 10 years. The overall effect size was g = 0.54 (95% CI 0.40-0.69; NNT = 5.87), with high heterogeneity ( = 78; 95% CI 71-83), and a broad PI (-0.31-1.39). The effects remained significant in a series of sensitivity analyses, including exclusion of outliers, adjustment for publication bias, for studies with low risk of bias, and in multilevel analyses. The results were comparable for depression and anxiety separately. At 6 months after randomisation the main effects were still significant, but not at 12 months, although the number of studies was small. Transdiagnostic treatments of patients with depression or anxiety are increasingly examined and are probably effective at the short term.

Abstract Objective Evidence suggests that social skills training (SST) is an efficacious intervention for negative symptoms in psychosis, whereas evidence of efficacy in other psychosis symptom domains is limited. The current article reports a comprehensive meta-analytic review of the evidence for SST across relevant outcome measures, control comparisons, and follow-up assessments. The secondary aim of this study was to identify and investigate the efficacy of SST subtypes. Methods A systematic literature search identified 27 randomized controlled trials including N = 1437 participants. Trials assessing SST against active controls, treatment-as-usual (TAU), and waiting list control were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool. A series of 70 meta-analytic comparisons provided effect sizes in Hedges’ g. Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed. Results SST demonstrated superiority over TAU (g = 0.3), active controls (g = 0.2–0.3), and comparators pooled (g = 0.2–0.3) for negative symptoms, and over TAU (g = 0.4) and comparators pooled (g = 0.3) for general psychopathology. Superiority was indicated in a proportion of comparisons for all symptoms pooled and social outcome measures. SST subtype comparisons were underpowered, although social-cognitive approaches demonstrated superiority vs comparators pooled. SST treatment effects were maintained at proportion of follow-up comparisons. Conclusions SST demonstrates a magnitude of effect for negative symptoms similar to those commonly reported for cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for positive symptoms, although unlike CBT, SST is not routinely recommended in treatment guidelines for psychological intervention. SST may have potential for wider implementation. Further stringent effectiveness research alongside wider pilot implementation of SST in community mental health teams is warranted.

There is considerable evidence that waiting list (WL) control groups overestimate the effect sizes of psychotherapies for depression. It is not clear, however, what are the exact causes for this overestimation. We decided to conduct a meta-analytic study to compare trials on psychotherapy for depression with a WL control group against trials with a care-as-usual (CAU) control group. We used an existing meta-analytic database of randomized trials comparing psychological treatments of adult depression with control groups and selected trials using a WL or a CAU control group. We used subgroup and meta-regression analyses to examine differences in effect sizes between WL and CAU controlled trials. We included 333 randomized controlled trials (472 comparisons; total number participants: 41,480), 141 with a WL and 195 with a CAU control group (3 included both). We found several significant differences between WL and CAU controlled trials (in type of therapy examined, treatment format, recency, target group, recruitment strategy, number of treatment arms and number of depression outcome measures). The overall effect size indicating the difference between treatment and control at post-test for all comparisons was = 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71; 0.84) with high heterogeneity ( = 84; 95% CI: 82; 85). A highly significant difference was observed between studies with a CAU control group ( = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.55; 0.71; = 85; 95% CI: 83; 86) and studies with a WL ( = 0.95; 95% CI: 0.85; 1.04; = 80; 95% CI: 78; 82; for difference < 0.001). This difference remained significant in all sensitivity analyses, including a meta-regression analysis in which we adjusted for all differences in characteristics of studies with a WL versus CAU control group. We also found that pre-post effect sizes in WL control conditions ( = 0.37; 95% CI: 0.28; 0.46) were significantly smaller than change within CAU conditions ( = 0.64; 95% CI: 0.50; 0.78). We found few indications that pre-post effect sizes within therapy conditions differed between WL and CAU controlled trials. WL control conditions considerably overestimate the effect sizes of psychological treatments, compared to trials using CAU control conditions. This overestimation is probably caused by a smaller improvement within the WL condition compared to the improvement in the CAU condition. WL control conditions should be avoided in randomized trials examining psychological treatments of adult depression.

Internet-based cognitive behavioural therapy (iCBT) is an effective and acceptable treatment for depression, especially when it includes guidance, but its treatment adherence has not yet been systematically studied. We conducted a meta-analysis, comparing the adherence to guided iCBT with the adherence to individual face-to-face CBT. Studies were selected from a database of trials that investigate treatment for adult depression (see www.evidencebasedpsychotherapies.org), updated to January 2013. We identified 24 studies describing 26 treatment conditions (14 face-to-face CBT, 12 guided iCBT), by means of these inclusion criteria: targeting depressed adults, no comorbid somatic disorder or substance abuse, community recruitment, published in the year 2000 or later. The main outcome measure was the percentage of completed sessions. We also coded the percentage of treatment completers (separately coding for 100% or at least 80% of treatment completed). We did not find studies that compared guided iCBT and face-to-face CBT in a single trial that met our inclusion criteria. Face-to-face CBT treatments ranged from 12 to 28 sessions, guided iCBT interventions consisted of 5 to 9 sessions. Participants in face-to-face CBT completed on average 83.9% of their treatment, which did not differ significantly from participants in guided iCBT (80.8%, P  =  .59). The percentage of completers (total intervention) was significantly higher in face-to-face CBT (84.7%) than in guided iCBT (65.1%, P < .001), as was the percentage of completers of 80% or more of the intervention (face-to-face CBT: 85.2%, guided iCBT: 67.5%, P  =  .003). Non-completers of face-to-face CBT completed on average 24.5% of their treatment, while non-completers of guided iCBT completed on average 42.1% of their treatment. We did not find studies that compared guided iCBT and face-to-face CBT in a single trial. Adherence to guided iCBT appears to be adequate and could be equal to adherence to face-to-face CBT.

Meta-analyses show that psychotherapies are effective in the treatment of depression in children and adolescents. However, these effects are usually reported in terms of effect sizes. For patients and clinicians, it is important to know whether patients achieve a clinically significant improvement or deterioration. We conducted such a meta-analysis to examine response, clinically significant change, clinically significant deterioration and recovery as outcomes. We searched four bibliographic databases and included 40 randomised trials comparing psychotherapy for youth depression against control conditions. We used a validated method to estimate outcome rates, based on means, standard deviation and N at baseline and post-test. We also calculated numbers-need-to- treat (NNT). The overall response rate in psychotherapies at 2 (±1) months after baseline was 39% (95% CI: 34–45) and 24% (95% CI: 0.19–28) in control conditions (NNT: 6.2). The difference between therapy and control was still significant at 6–12 months after baseline (NNT=7.8). Clinically significant improvement was found in 54% of youth in therapy, compared with 32% in control groups (NNT=5.3); clinically significant deterioration was 6% in therapy, 13% in controls (NNT=5.1); recovery was 58% in therapy, 36% in controls (NNT=3.3). Smaller effects were found in studies with low risk of bias. Psychotherapies for depression in youth are effective compared to control conditions, but more than 60% of youth receiving therapy do not respond. More effective treatments and treatment strategies are clearly needed. Trial registration https://osf.io/84xka

BackgroundStudies have identified high rates of mental disorders in refugees, but most used self-report measures of psychiatric symptoms. In this study, we examined the percentages of adult refugees and asylum seekers meeting diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder (MDD), post-traumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder (BPD), and psychosis.MethodsA systematic literature search in three databases was conducted. We included studies examining the prevalence of MDD, post-traumatic stress disorder, BPD, and psychosis in adult refugees according to a clinical diagnosis. To estimate the pooled prevalence rates, we performed a meta-analysis using the Meta-prop package in Stata (PROSPERO: CRD42018111778).ResultsWe identified 7048 records and 40 studies (11 053 participants) were included. The estimated pooled prevalence rates were 32% (95% CI 26–39%; I2 = 99%) for MDD, 31% (95% CI 25–38%; I2 = 99.5%) for post-traumatic stress disorder, 5% (95% CI 2–9%; I2 = 97.7%) for BPD, and 1% (95% CI 1–2%; I2 = 0.00%) for psychosis. Subgroup analyses showed significantly higher prevalence rates of MDD in studies conducted in low-middle income countries (47%; 95% CI 38–57%, p = 0.001) than high-income countries studies (28%; 95% CI 22–33%), and in studies which used the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (37%; 95% CI 28–46% p = 0.05) compared to other diagnostic interviews (26%; 95% CI 20–33%). Studies among convenience samples reported significant (p = 0.001) higher prevalence rates of MDD (35%; 95% CI 23–46%) and PTSD (34%; 95% CI 22–47%) than studies among probability-based samples (MDD: 30%; 95% CI 21–39%; PTSD: 28%; 95% 19–37%).ConclusionsThis meta-analysis has shown a markedly high prevalence of mental disorders among refugees. Our results underline the devastating effects of war and violence, and the necessity to provide mental health intervention to address mental disorders among refugees. The results should be cautiously interpreted due to the high heterogeneity.

Successful treatment of parental depression may have a positive effect on the functioning and psychopathology of their children. We conducted a meta-analysis to examine the effects of psychotherapy for depressed mothers on their children and parental functioning. We used a database of randomized controlled trials examining the effects of psychotherapy for adult depression and selected trials comparing psychotherapy and control conditions in depressed mothers and reporting outcomes in their children and parental functioning. Nine studies were included. The quality of these studies was not optimal and the outcome instruments differed considerably from each other. The therapies resulted in significantly decreased levels of depression ( g  = 0.66) in the mothers. In the seven studies that reported outcomes on the mental health of children, a significant effect size was also found ( g  = 0.40). The eight studies examining mother–child interactions resulted in a significant effect size of g  = 0.35, and the five studies examining parenting/marital distress had a pooled effect size of g  = 0.67. We found that psychotherapy leads to decreased levels of depression in depressed mothers and also found indications that psychotherapy may have a positive effect on the mental health of their children and parenting/marital distress. However, more high-quality research is needed before a definite answer can be given.

The current umbrella review aimed to assess and summarise evidence on universal, selective and indicated interventions for mental health at the workplace. This umbrella review forms one of the evidence reviews which were commissioned by the WHO to develop global guidelines on mental health at work. We conducted systematic searches in five bibliographic databases (PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane and Global Medicus Index) and included meta-analyses of randomised trials examining psychosocial, physical activity and lifestyle interventions delivered to all general workers (universal interventions), at-risk workers (selective interventions) and workers already experiencing symptoms of mental disorders (indicated interventions). We included outcomes from seven domains: symptoms of mental health conditions, positive mental health, quality of life, work-related outcomes, substance use, suicide-related outcomes and potential adverse effects. We identified 16 meta-analyses producing 66 pooled effect sizes of the examined interventions, mostly on symptoms of mental health conditions (n=43 pooled effect sizes) (eg, burnout, insomnia, stress) and positive mental health (n=15) (eg, well-being). Most of the evidence on universal, selective and indicated interventions was focused on psychosocial interventions, showing small to moderate effects across the various outcomes. Certainty levels according to GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) were low to very low in almost all of the examined outcomes. The results of existing meta-analyses are promising for the use of preventative and early treatment interventions in the workplace. However, the quality and certainty of the evidence were very modest, and further research on the effectiveness of these interventions is warranted.