TY - JOUR
T1 - What constitutes sufficient evidence for case formulation-driven CBT for psychosis? Cumulative meta-analysis of the effect on hallucinations and delusions
AU - Turner, David T.
AU - Burger, Simone
AU - Smit, Filip
AU - Valmaggia, Lucia R.
AU - van der Gaag, Mark
PY - 2020/9/1
Y1 - 2020/9/1
N2 - Objective: Following 2 decades of research on cognitive behavioral therapy for psychosis (CBTp), it is relevant to consider at which point the evidence base is considered sufficient. We completed a cumulative meta-analysis to assess the sufficiency and stability of the evidence base for hallucinations and delusions.Method: We updated the systematic search from our previous meta-analytic review from August 2013 until December 2019. We identified 20 new randomized controlled trials (RCTs) resulting in inclusion of 35 RCTs comparing CBTp with treatment-as-usual (TAU) or active controls (AC). We analyzed data from participants with psychosis (N = 2407) over 75 conventional meta-analytic comparisons. We completed cumulative meta-analyses (including fail-safe ratios) for key comparisons. Publication bias, heterogeneity, and risk of bias were examined.Results: Cumulative meta-analyses demonstrated sufficiency and stability of evidence for hallucinations and delusions. The fail-safe ratio demonstrated that the evidence base was sufficient in 2016 for hallucinations and 2015 for delusions. In conventional meta-analyses, CBTp was superior for hallucinations (g = 0.34, P <.01) and delusions (g = 0.37, P <.01) when compared with any control. Compared with TAU, CBTp demonstrated superiority for hallucinations (g = 0.34, P <.01) and delusions (g = 0.37, P <.01). Compared with AC, CBT was superior for hallucinations (g = 0.34, P <.01), but not for delusions although this comparison was underpowered. Sensitivity analyses for case formulation, primary outcome focus, and risk of bias demonstrated increases in effect magnitude for hallucinations.C onclusions: The evidence base for the effect of CBTp on hallucinations and delusions demonstrates sufficiency and stability across comparisons, suggesting limited value of new trials evaluating generic CBTp.
AB - Objective: Following 2 decades of research on cognitive behavioral therapy for psychosis (CBTp), it is relevant to consider at which point the evidence base is considered sufficient. We completed a cumulative meta-analysis to assess the sufficiency and stability of the evidence base for hallucinations and delusions.Method: We updated the systematic search from our previous meta-analytic review from August 2013 until December 2019. We identified 20 new randomized controlled trials (RCTs) resulting in inclusion of 35 RCTs comparing CBTp with treatment-as-usual (TAU) or active controls (AC). We analyzed data from participants with psychosis (N = 2407) over 75 conventional meta-analytic comparisons. We completed cumulative meta-analyses (including fail-safe ratios) for key comparisons. Publication bias, heterogeneity, and risk of bias were examined.Results: Cumulative meta-analyses demonstrated sufficiency and stability of evidence for hallucinations and delusions. The fail-safe ratio demonstrated that the evidence base was sufficient in 2016 for hallucinations and 2015 for delusions. In conventional meta-analyses, CBTp was superior for hallucinations (g = 0.34, P <.01) and delusions (g = 0.37, P <.01) when compared with any control. Compared with TAU, CBTp demonstrated superiority for hallucinations (g = 0.34, P <.01) and delusions (g = 0.37, P <.01). Compared with AC, CBT was superior for hallucinations (g = 0.34, P <.01), but not for delusions although this comparison was underpowered. Sensitivity analyses for case formulation, primary outcome focus, and risk of bias demonstrated increases in effect magnitude for hallucinations.C onclusions: The evidence base for the effect of CBTp on hallucinations and delusions demonstrates sufficiency and stability across comparisons, suggesting limited value of new trials evaluating generic CBTp.
KW - Positive symptoms
KW - Psychological intervention
KW - Randomized controlled trials
KW - Schizophrenia
KW - Systematic review
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85091751312&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85091751312&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbaa045
DO - https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbaa045
M3 - Article
C2 - 32221536
SN - 0586-7614
VL - 46
SP - 1072
EP - 1085
JO - Schizophrenia Bulletin
JF - Schizophrenia Bulletin
IS - 5
ER -