Explore the vast range of titles available.

هدفت الدراسة إلى التحقق من فاعلية برنامج قائم على العلاج ما وراء المعرفي في خفض اضطراب القلق الاجتماعي وتقديم الذات الكمالي لدى عينة من طلاب كلية التربية. اعتمدت الدراسة على المنهج شبه التجريبي، باستخدام تصميم المجموعة التجريبية والمجموعة الضابطة مع القياس القبلي والبعدي والتتبعي. وتكونت عينة الدراسة الأساسية من (۲۰) طالبا وطالبة من طلاب كلية التربية بجامعة عين شمس، تراوحت أعمارهم الزمنية بين (۲۰-۲۱) سنة، بمتوسط عمري قدره (۲۰,۳۳) سنة، وانحراف معياري (٠,٥٣). وتم تقسيمهم إلى مجموعتين متكافئتين إحداهما تجريبية خضعت للبرنامج العلاجي القائم على فنيات العلاج ما وراء المعرفي، والأخرى ضابطة لم تتلق أي تدخل. واستخدم الباحث مقياس القلق الاجتماعي للبالغين (SAQ) من إعداد Caballo et al., (2015)، وكذلك مقياس تقديم الذات الكمالي من إعداد Hewitt et al., (2003)، بعد ترجمتهما بواسطة الباحث والتحقق من الصدق والثبات، للتحقق من كفاءتهما السيكومترية، كما أعد البرنامج العلاجي. وقد اشتمل البرنامج على (۲۰) جلسة استندت إلى فنيات العلاج ما وراء المعرفي مثل: تدريب الانتباه (ATT) اليقظة الذهنية المنفصلة، واستكشاف المعتقدات الميتامعرفية، بهدف إعادة بناء العمليات المعرفية المسؤولة عن استمرارية اضطراب القلق الاجتماعي وتقديم الذات الكمالي. وأظهرت نتائج الدراسة فاعلية البرنامج ما وراء المعرفي في خفض اضطراب القلق الاجتماعي وتقديم الذات الكمالي، كما أظهرت النتائج استمرار أثر البرنامج بعد فترة من تطبيقه.

Background Metacognitive therapy (MCT) is a relatively new approach to treating mental disorders. The aim of the current meta‐analysis was to examine the efficacy of MCT in patients with mental disorders. Method A comprehensive literature search revealed 16 published as well as unpublished studies on the efficacy of MCT, of which nine were controlled trials. These studies report on 384 participants suffering from anxiety or depression. Treatment efficacy was examined using a random effects model. Results On primary outcome measures the aggregate within‐group pre‐ to posttreatment and pretreatment to follow‐up effect sizes for MCT were large (Hedges’ g = 2.00 and 1.65, respectively). Within‐group pre‐ to posttreatment changes in metacognitions were also large (Hedges’ g = 1.18) and maintained at follow‐up (Hedges’ g = 1.31). Across the controlled trials, MCT was significantly more effective than both waitlist control groups (between‐group Hedges’ g = 1.81) as well as cognitive behavior therapy (CBT; between‐group Hedges’ g = 0.97). Conclusions Results suggest that MCT is effective in treating disorders of anxiety and depression and is superior compared to waitlist control groups and CBT, although the latter finding should be interpreted with caution. The implications of these findings are limited by small sample sizes and few active control conditions. Future studies should include larger sample sizes and also include comparisons of MCT with other empirically supported therapies.

Purpose Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is prevalent among survivors. However, a comprehensive and universally accepted theoretical framework of FCR to guide intervention is lacking. This paper reviews theoretical frameworks previously used to explain FCR and describes the formulation of a novel theoretical framework for FCR. Methods A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to identify conceptual frameworks or theories applied to FCR. MEDLINE, PubMED, CINAHL, AMED, PsycINFO and Web of Science were searched. Identified conceptual frameworks were reviewed for strength of evidence supporting their validity. Results Of 558 papers initially identified, 16 made reference to six different conceptual frameworks relating to FCR. The most comprehensive and evidence-based theoretical approach is the Common Sense Model (CSM). Other approaches have limited evidence supporting their application to FCR. Two theoretical approaches developed in the context of emotional disorders that appear to be highly relevant to FCR: the Self-Regulatory Executive Function (S-REF) model and Relational Frame Theory were combined with the CSM to produce a novel cognitive processing account of FCR. Conclusions Few conceptual frameworks have been used consistently to guide FCR research, and not all frameworks are empirically well supported, suggesting that further discussion regarding the conceptualisation of FCR is needed. The novel theoretical framework for FCR presented highlights the multidimensional nature of FCR and the importance of cognitive processing and metacognitions in the development and maintenance of FCR. Implications for Cancer Survivors The novel theoretical formulation of FCR outlined here provides a much-needed comprehensive framework to further investigate and address FCR in cancer survivors.

Cognitive remediation (CR) can reduce the cognitive difficulties experienced by people with psychosis. Adapting CR to be delivered remotely provides new opportunities for extending its use. However, doing so requires further evaluation of its acceptability from service users' views. We evaluate the acceptability of therapist-supported remote CR from the perspectives of service users using participatory service user-centred methods. After receiving 12 weeks of therapist-supported remote CR, service users were interviewed by a service user researcher following a semi-structured 18-question interview guide. Transcripts were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis with themes and codes further validated by a Lived Experience Advisory Panel and member checking. The study recruited 26 participants, almost all of whom reported high acceptability of remote CR, and some suggested improvements. Four themes emerged: (1) perceived treatment benefits, (2) remote versus in-person therapy, (3) the therapist's role, and (4) how it could be better. This study used comprehensive service user involvement methods. For some participants, technology use remained a challenge and addressing these difficulties detracted from the therapy experience. These outcomes align with existing research on remote therapy, suggesting that remote CR can expand choice and improve access to treatment for psychosis service users once barriers are addressed. Future use of remote CR should consider technology training and equipment provision to facilitate therapy for service users and therapists.

Metacognitive therapy has become a field of increasing interest in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder and has increasingly been discussed in literature. This study aimed to review the effectiveness of metacognitive therapy in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder. Accordingly, a review of ScienceDirect, PubMed, Web of Science, and EBSCOHost databases revealed that 11 studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The included studies were evaluated in various aspects such as sample, methodology and results. The results of the review revealed that patients diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder who receive metacognitive therapy have significantly reduced levels of worry and anxiety and that the majority of these patients demonstrate clinical recovery. Following metacognitive therapy, it was determined that the proportion of patients who no longer met the diagnostic criteria for generalized anxiety disorder and completely recovered was relatively high. The results also demonstrate that metacognitive therapy yields higher recovery rates than applied relaxation, cognitive behavioral therapy and intolerance of uncertainty therapy and stands out as a more effective treatment option in the short and long term. Metacognitive therapy significantly reduces both positive and negative metacognitive beliefs, which play critical role in the development and maintenance of generalized anxiety disorder. Furthermore, metacognitive therapy is an effective intervention in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder, regardless of whether it is applied in an individual or group format.

Background Clinically significant anxiety and depression symptoms are common in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and associated with a range of negative outcomes. Preliminary evidence suggests that the attention training technique (ATT), a component of metacognitive therapy (MCT), delivered in a group format, is feasible and potentially effective in reducing symptoms of anxiety and depression in these patients. Patients’ experiences of treatment including facilitators and barriers are useful in order to further develop effective intervention. We are not aware of any previous qualitative studies conducted on ATT in patients with CHD. Our study aimed to assess the treatment experiences in these patients. Methods Patients ( N  = 10) with CHD and significant symptoms of anxiety and/or depression, who participated in a randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of ATT delivered in a group format, were recruited to in-depth, individual interviews three months after treatment completion. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed according to the principles of thematic analysis. Results Nine males and one female participated, with a mean age of 54.3 (range 45–63) years. Mean time since cardiac event was 54.2 months. We identified two main themes; non-specific ATT treatment factors and group ATT-specific treatment factors. Furthermore, non-specific ATT treatment factors included subthemes relating to individual and group factors. These subthemes encompassed the (relational aspects such as the) interaction between the group patients, interaction between the patients and the therapist, and the therapist’s delivery of the group ATT. Second, specific ATT treatment factors included subthemes concerning understanding and making sense of the technique and treatment, changes in relation to thoughts and thinking, and group format as a facilitator of ATT treatment. Conclusions Group ATT was perceived as helpful among outpatients with CHD in terms of symptom relief. Both general and ATT specific factors were regarded important, and the patients seemed to understand ATT in a way that is consistent with the rationale of ATT treatment. All patients emphasized the importance of the group format. Trial registration The study was approved by the Regional Committee of Ethics (REK) South East Norway (REK 52002) and by the data protection officer at Drammen Hospital (20/04048-1/005). The study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier NCT05621408).

Background Identifying predictors of treatment outcome can guide treatment selection and optimize use of resources. In patients affected by obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), perfectionism has emerged as one possible predictor, with some data suggesting that cognitive-behavioral therapy outcomes are poorer for more perfectionistic patients. Findings so far are inconsistent, however, and research has yet to be extended to newer treatment approaches. Methods We administered measures of concern over mistakes, clinical perfectionism, as well as OCD and depression symptom severity to a sample of OCD patients in out-patient group treatments ( N  = 61), namely, metacognitive training (MCT-OCD) or mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) for OCD. Hierarchical data over time was submitted to multi-level analysis. Results Neither concern over mistakes nor clinical perfectionism at baseline predicted OCD symptoms across time points. However, concern over mistakes at baseline did significantly predict comorbid depressive symptoms. Furthermore, exploratory analysis revealed change in clinical perfectionism during treatment as a predictor of OCD symptoms at follow-up. Conclusion These results suggest that initial concern over mistakes may not prevent patients with OCD from benefitting from third-wave treatments. Change in clinical perfectionism may present a putative process of therapeutic change. Limitations and avenues for future research are discussed.

Background Metacognitive therapy (MCT) is a modern therapeutic approach gaining wider use for psychological problems. This review evaluates the efficacy of MCT on depressive symptom severity. Method This review followed Cochrane and PRISMA-2020 guidelines. A comprehensive literature search revealed 51 studies on the efficacy of MCT, of which 33 were trials. A random-effects model was used to assess treatment efficacy. We calculated effect sizes using (Hedge’s g ) SMD for the percentage change index. (PROSPERO registration (CRD420251024202)). Results Within-group aggregate effect sizes for the depression outcome measure, mean change for studies was Hedge’s g = (-2.29), 95% CI (-2.75 | -1.83), ( P < 0.001). Between-group analyses combined effect size for depression outcome, the mean change of aggregate effect size for the studies comparing MCT to the control group was Hedge’s g =(-1.28), 95% CI (-1.71 | -0.86). Both effect sizes were highly significant ( Ps < 0.000). Conclusions Findings indicate that metacognitive therapy appears to be an efficacious intervention for depressive disorders and is superior to waitlist control conditions. However, interpretation is limited by small sample sizes and the lack of active comparison groups. Future investigations should employ larger samples and include head-to-head comparisons with other evidence-based psychotherapies.

Cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) is the treatment of choice for generalised anxiety disorder (GAD), yielding significant improvements in approximately 50% of patients. There is significant room for improvement in the outcomes of treatment, especially in recovery. We aimed to compare metacognitive therapy (MCT) with the gold standard treatment, CBT, in patients with GAD (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00426426). A total of 246 patients with long-term GAD were assessed and 81 were randomised into three conditions: CBT ( = 28), MCT ( = 32) and a wait-list control ( = 21). Assessments were made at pre-treatment, post-treatment and at 2 year follow-up. Both CBT and MCT were effective treatments, but MCT was more effective (mean difference 9.762, 95% CI 2.679-16.845, = 0.004) and led to significantly higher recovery rates (65% . 38%). These differences were maintained at 2 year follow-up. MCT seems to produce recovery rates that exceed those of CBT. These results demonstrate that the effects of treatment cannot be attributed to non-specific therapy factors. A.W. wrote the treatment protocol in MCT and several books on CBT and MCT, and receives royalties from these. T.D.B. wrote the protocol in CBT and has published several articles and chapters on CBT and receives royalties from these. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Metacognitive Therapy (MCT) and Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) are well-established treatments with scientific underpinnings. When focusing on the processes, we may contend that these two therapies share certain common denominators and it might be hypothesized that both therapies favor processes of habituation to intrusion, and this may give rise to the high efficacy both therapies reveal in problems involving high intrusion. The Objective is to compare the impact of MCT and ACT on cognitive intrusion according to the studies identified in a systematic review conducted accordingly. This study is a comparation of included original reports in papers on the use of MCT and ACT for treating GAD and OCD published in English in peer-reviewed journals. Only those papers were used in which the participants were assessed with the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS; Goodman et al., 1989 ) and the Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ; Meyer et al., 1990 ), as the main instruments for evaluating the cognitive symptoms of these disorders. Of the 1111 studies selected, 18 met all the review criteria and were therefore included. Our results reveal that MCT records better results than ACT. In conclusion, this may be because a better understanding of the workings of cognition may reduce the sense of threat, and therefore favor processes of habituation and greater acceptance and tolerance of the symptoms, thereby reducing a person’s distress.