| Project/Area Number |
23730688
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B)
|
| Allocation Type | Multi-year Fund |
|---|
| Research Field |
Clinical psychology
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Institute for Health Economics and Policy, Association for Health Economics Rsearch and Social Insurance and Welfare (2013)
National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry (2011-2012) |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
OKUMURA Yasuyuki 一般財団法人医療経済研究・社会保険福祉協会(医療経済研究機構(研究部)), その他部局等, 研究員 (50554383)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2011 – 2012
|
| Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 2013)
|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥1,300,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,000,000、Indirect Cost: ¥300,000)
Fiscal Year 2012: ¥650,000 (Direct Cost: ¥500,000、Indirect Cost: ¥150,000)
Fiscal Year 2011: ¥650,000 (Direct Cost: ¥500,000、Indirect Cost: ¥150,000)
|
|---|
| Keywords | メタ分析 / メタ解析 / 認知行動療法 / 無作為化比較試験 / ピアレビュー研究 / 研究の質 / 研究報告の質 / 認容性 / うつ病 / メタアナリシス / EBM |
|---|
| Research Abstract |
Despite treatment guidelines for depression placing group CBT between low- and high-intensity evidence-based interventions, the validity of the placement remains unknown. We aimed to systematically review evidence for the efficacy and acceptability of group CBT in patients with depression compared to four intensity levels of psychosocial interventions. From 7,953 records, we identified 35 RCTs that compared group CBT to non-active (k = 30), low-intensity (k = 2), middle-intensity (k = 8), and high-intensity (k = 1) interventions. Group CBT had a superior efficacy (SMD = -0.68) and a similar acceptability compared to non-active controls. Pooled results showed a small but non-significant excess of group CBT relative to middle-intensity interventions (SMD = -0.21). Over 60% of studies did not report enough information to judge selection and selective reporting bias. These results suggest the need for high-quality trials of group CBT compared to low- and high-intensity interventions.
|
