Internet‐delivered psychological treatments: from innovation to implementation

Internet interventions, and in particular Internet‐delivered cognitive behaviour therapy (ICBT), have existed for at least 20 years. Here we review the treatment approach and the evidence base, arguing that ICBT can be viewed as a vehicle for innovation. ICBT has been developed and tested for several psychiatric and somatic conditions, and direct comparative studies suggest that therapist‐guided ICBT is more effective than a waiting list for anxiety disorders and depression, and tends to be as effective as face‐to‐face CBT. Studies on the possible harmful effects of ICBT are also reviewed: a significant minority of people do experience negative effects, although rates of deterioration appear similar to those reported for face‐to‐face treatments and lower than for control conditions. We further review studies on change mechanisms and conclude that few, if any, consistent moderators and mediators of change have been identified. A recent trend to focus on knowledge acquisition is considered, and a discussion on the possibilities and hurdles of implementing ICBT is presented. The latter includes findings suggesting that attitudes toward ICBT may not be as positive as when using modern information technology as an adjunct to face‐to‐face therapy (i.e., blended treatment). Finally, we discuss future directions, including the role played by technology and machine learning, blended treatment, adaptation of treatment for minorities and non‐Western settings, other therapeutic approaches than ICBT (including Internet‐delivered psychodynamic and interpersonal psychotherapy as well as acceptance and commitment therapy), emerging regulations, and the importance of reporting failed trials.     

The status of psychodynamic psychotherapy as an empirically supported treatment for common mental disorders – an umbrella review based on updated criteria

To assess the current status of psychodynamic therapy (PDT) as an empirically supported treatment (EST), we carried out a pre-registered systematic umbrella review addressing the evidence for PDT in common mental disorders in adults, based on an updated model for ESTs. Following this model, we focused on meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the past two years to assess efficacy. In addition, we reviewed the evidence on effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and mechanisms of change. Meta-analyses were evaluated by at least two raters using the proposed updated criteria, i.e. effect sizes, risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision, publication bias, treatment fidelity, and their quality as well as that of primary studies. To assess the quality of evidence we applied the GRADE system. A systematic search identified recent meta-analyses on the efficacy of PDT in depressive, anxiety, personality and somatic symptom disorders. High quality evidence in depressive and somatic symptom disorders and moderate quality evidence in anxiety and personality disorders showed that PDT is superior to (inactive and active) control conditions in reducing target symptoms with clinically meaningful effect sizes. Moderate quality evidence suggests that PDT is as efficacious as other active therapies in these disorders. The benefits of PDT outweigh its costs and harms. Furthermore, evidence was found for long-term effects, improving functioning, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and mechanisms of change in the aforementioned disorders. Some limitations in specific research areas exist, such as risk of bias and imprecision, which are, however, comparable to those of other evidence-based psychotherapies. Thus, according to the updated EST model, PDT proved to be an empirically-supported treatment for common mental disorders. Of the three options for recommendation provided by the updated model (i.e., “very strong”, “strong” or “weak”), the new EST criteria suggest that a strong recommendation for treating the aforementioned mental disorders with PDT is the most appropriate option. In conclusion, PDT represents an evidence-based psychotherapy. This is clinically important since no single therapeutic approach fits all psychiatric patients, as shown by the limited success rates across all evidence-based treatments.     

Efficacy and acceptability of pharmacological,psychosocial, and brain stimulation interventions in children and adolescents with mental disorders: an umbrella review

Top‐tier evidence on the safety/tolerability of 80 medications in children/adolescents with mental disorders has recently been reviewed in this jour­nal. To guide clinical practice, such data must be combined with evidence on efficacy and acceptability. Besides medications, psychosocial inter­ventions and brain stimulation techniques are treatment options for children/adolescents with mental disorders. For this umbrella review, we systematically searched network meta‐analyses (NMAs) and meta‐analyses (MAs) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating 48 medications, 20 psychosocial interventions, and four brain stimulation techniques in children/adolescents with 52 different mental disorders or groups of mental disorders, reporting on 20 different efficacy/acceptability outcomes. Co‐primary outcomes were disease‐specific symptom reduction and all‐cause discontinuation (“acceptability”). We included 14 NMAs and 90 MAs, reporting on 15 mental disorders or groups of mental disorders. Overall, 21 medications outperformed placebo regarding the co‐primary outcomes, and three psychosocial interventions did so (while seven outperformed waiting list/no treatment). Based on the meta‐analytic evidence, the most convincing efficacy profile emerged for amphetamines, methylphenidate and, to a smaller extent, behavioral therapy in attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder; aripiprazole, risperidone and several psychosocial interventions in autism; risperidone and behavioral interventions in disruptive behavior disorders; several antipsychotics in schizophrenia spectrum disorders; fluoxetine, the combination of fluoxetine and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and interpersonal therapy in depression; aripiprazole in mania; fluoxetine and group CBT in anxiety disorders; fluoxetine/selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, CBT, and behavioral therapy with exposure and response prevention in obsessive‐compulsive disorder; CBT in post‐traumatic stress disorder; imipramine and alarm behavioral intervention in enuresis; behavioral therapy in encopresis; and family therapy in anorexia nervosa. Results from this umbrella review of interventions for mental disorders in children/adolescents provide evidence‐based information for clinical decision making.     

Feasibility of guided cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) self-help for childhood anxiety disorders in primary care

Anxiety disorders in childhood are common, disabling and run a chronic course. Cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) is effective but expensive and trained therapists are scarce. Guided self-help treatments may be a means of widening access to treatment. This study aimed to examine the feasibility of guided CBT self-help in primary care for childhood anxiety disorders, specifically in terms of therapist adherence, patient and therapist satisfaction and clinical gain.Participants were children aged between five and 12 years referred to two primary child and adolescent mental health services (PCAMHSs) in Oxfordshire, UK, who met diagnostic criteria for a primary anxiety disorder. Of the 52 eligible children, 41 anxious children were assessed for anxiety severity and interference before and after receiving CBT self-help delivered via a parent (total therapy time = five hours) by primary mental health workers (PMHWs). Therapy sessions were rated for treatment adherence and parents and PMHWs completed satisfaction questionnaires after treatment completion. Over 80% of therapy sessions were rated at a high level of treatment adherence. Parents and PMHWs reported high satisfaction with the treatment. Sixty-one percent of the children assessed no longer met the criteria for their primary anxiety disorder diagnosis following treatment, and 76% were rated as 'much'/'very much' improved on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) scale. There were significant reductions on parent and child report measures of anxiety symptoms, interference and depression. Preliminary exploration indicated that parental anxiety was associated with child treatment outcome. The findings suggest that guided CBT self-help represents a promising treatment for childhood anxiety in primary care.     

The effectiveness of psychodynamic psychotherapies: An update

This paper provides a comprehensive review of outcome studies and meta‐analyses of effectiveness studies of psychodynamic therapy (PDT) for the major categories of mental disorders. Comparisons with inactive controls (waitlist, treatment as usual and placebo) generally but by no means invariably show PDT to be effective for depression, some anxiety disorders, eating disorders and somatic disorders. There is little evidence to support its implementation for post‐traumatic stress disorder, obsessive‐compulsive disorder, bulimia nervosa, cocaine dependence or psychosis. The strongest current evidence base supports relatively long‐term psychodynamic treatment of some personality disorders, particularly borderline personality disorder. Comparisons with active treatments rarely identify PDT as superior to control interventions and studies are generally not appropriately designed to provide tests of statistical equivalence. Studies that demonstrate inferiority of PDT to alternatives exist, but are small in number and often questionable in design. Reviews of the field appear to be subject to allegiance effects. The present review recommends abandoning the inherently conservative strategy of comparing heterogeneous “families” of therapies for heterogeneous diagnostic groups. Instead, it advocates using the opportunities provided by bioscience and computational psychiatry to creatively explore and assess the value of protocol‐directed combinations of specific treatment components to address the key problems of individual patients.     

Telemental health: A status update

A rather large body of literature now exists on the use of telemental health services in the diagnosis and management of various psychiatric conditions. This review aims to provide an up‐to‐date assessment of telemental health, focusing on four main areas: computerized CBT (cCBT), Internet‐based CBT (iCBT), virtual reality exposure therapy (VRET), and mobile therapy (mTherapy). Four scientific databases were searched and, where possible, larger, better‐designed meta‐analyses and controlled trials were highlighted. Taken together, published studies support an expanded role for telepsychiatry tools, with advantages that include increased care access, enhanced efficiency, reduced stigma associated with visiting mental health clinics, and the ability to bypass diagnosis‐specific obstacles to treatment, such as when social anxiety prevents a patient from leaving the house. Of technology‐mediated therapies, cCBT and iCBT possess the most efficacy evidence, with VRET and mTherapy representing promising but less researched options that have grown in parallel with virtual reality and mobile technology advances. Nonetheless, telepsychiatry remains challenging because of the need for specific computer skills, the difficulty in providing patients with a deep understanding or support, concerns about the “therapeutic alliance”, privacy fears, and the well documented problem of patient attrition. Future studies should further test the efficacy, advantages and limitations of technology‐enabled CBT, as well as explore the online delivery of other psychotherapeutic and psychopharmacological modalities.     

Therapist-supported Internet-based cognitive behaviour therapy yields similar effects as face-to-face therapy for psychiatric and somatic disorders: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Providing therapist-guided cognitive behaviour therapy via the Internet (ICBT) has advantages, but a central research question is to what extent similar clinical effects can be obtained as with gold-standard face-to-face cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT). In a previous meta-analysis published in this journal, which was updated in 2018, we found evidence that the pooled effects for the two formats were equivalent in the treatment of psychiatric and somatic disorders, but the number of published randomized trials was relatively low (n=20). As this is a field that moves rapidly, the aim of the current study was to conduct an update of our systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical effects of ICBT vs. face-to-face CBT for psychiatric and somatic disorders in adults. We searched the PubMed database for relevant studies published from 2016 to 2022. The main inclusion criteria were that studies had to compare ICBT to face-to-face CBT using a randomized controlled design and targeting adult populations. Quality assessment was made using the Cochrane risk of bias criteria (Version 1), and the main outcome estimate was the pooled standardized effect size (Hedges’ g) using a random effects model. We screened 5,601 records and included 11 new randomized trials, adding them to the 20 previously identified ones (total n=31). Sixteen different clinical conditions were targeted in the included studies. Half of the trials were in the fields of depression/depressive symptoms or some form of anxiety disorder. The pooled effect size across all disorders was g=0.02 (95% CI: –0.09 to 0.14) and the quality of the included studies was acceptable. This meta-analysis further supports the notion that therapist-supported ICBT yields similar effects as face-to-face CBT.     

Effects of an insect‐mediated mental healthcare program for mentally disordered children

Insects are the most diverse groups of animals on the planet, representing more than one‐half of all known living organisms, and are found in nearly every environment. Recently, the importance of insects as food sources or as pets has increased in many countries, including Korea. In addition, several insects have been shown to exert a strong influence on people's emotions. Our insect‐mediated mental healthcare program is designed to help meet the physical, behavioral and developmental needs of people with mental disorders. Children with mental disorders, the experimental group, were provided with an insect‐mediated mental healthcare program for a total of eight sessions, one session per week, at 1–2 h per session, accompanied by a pre‐test and post‐test. The overall, gender, education level, and mental disease profiles of the participants in this study were balanced. Our results indicated that children who participated in the insect‐mediated healthcare program group once showed significant improvement in their emotional health and insect awareness. Additionally, paired education level's t‐tests showed that the outcomes of the participants in treatment group were significantly improved (α < 0.05). However, participants' satisfaction with their school life (middle school) was not influenced. These results suggest that insects positively influence children's emotional health through an insect‐mediated healthcare program. Further research on the basis of this study is expected to help children with emotional therapy in other areas.     

The symptom‐specific efficacy of antidepressant medication vs. cognitive behavioral therapy in the treatment of depression: results from an individual patient data meta‐analysis

A recent individual patient data meta‐analysis showed that antidepressant medication is slightly more efficacious than cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in reducing overall depression severity in patients with a DSM‐defined depressive disorder. We used an update of that dataset, based on seventeen randomized clinical trials, to examine the comparative efficacy of antidepressant medication vs. CBT in more detail by focusing on individual depressive symptoms as assessed with the 17‐item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. Five symptoms (i.e., “depressed mood” , “feelings of guilt” , “suicidal thoughts” , “psychic anxiety” and “general somatic symptoms”) showed larger improvements in the medication compared to the CBT condition (effect sizes ranging from .13 to .16), whereas no differences were found for the twelve other symptoms. In addition, network estimation techniques revealed that all effects, except that on “depressed mood” , were direct and could not be explained by any of the other direct or indirect treatment effects. Exploratory analyses showed that information about the symptom‐specific efficacy could help in identifying those patients who, based on their pre‐treatment symptomatology, are likely to benefit more from antidepressant medication than from CBT (effect size of .30) versus those for whom both treatments are likely to be equally efficacious. Overall, our symptom‐oriented approach results in a more thorough evaluation of the efficacy of antidepressant medication over CBT and shows potential in “precision psychiatry” .     

Nature and prevalence of combinations of mental disorders and their association with excess mortality in a population‐based cohort study

The nature and prevalence of combinations of mental disorders and their associations with premature mortality have never been reported in a comprehensive way. We describe the most common combinations of mental disorders and estimate excess mortality associated with these combinations. We designed a population‐based cohort study including all 7,505,576 persons living in Denmark at some point between January 1, 1995 and December 31, 2016. Information on mental disorders and mortality was obtained from national registers. A total of 546,090 individuals (10.5%) living in Denmark on January 1, 1995 were diagnosed with at least one mental disorder during the 22‐year follow‐up period. The overall crude rate of diagnosis of mental disorders was 9.28 (95% CI: 9.26‐9.30) per 1,000 person‐years. The rate of diagnosis of additional mental disorders was 70.01 (95% CI: 69.80‐70.26) per 1,000 person‐years for individuals with one disorder already diagnosed. At the end of follow‐up, two out of five individuals with mental disorders were diagnosed with two or more disorder types. The most prevalent were neurotic/stress‐related/somatoform disorders (ICD‐10 F40‐F48) and mood disorders (ICD‐10 F30‐F39), which – alone or in combination with other disorders – were present in 64.8% of individuals diagnosed with any mental disorder. Mortality rates were higher for people with mental disorders compared to those without mental disorders. The highest mortality rate ratio was 5.97 (95% CI: 5.52‐6.45) for the combination of schizophrenia (ICD‐10 F20‐F29), neurotic/stress‐related/somatoform disorders and substance use disorders (ICD‐10 F10‐F19). Any combination of mental disorders was associated with a shorter life expectancy compared to the general Danish population, with differences in remaining life expectancy ranging from 5.06 years (95% CI: 5.01‐5.11) to 17.46 years (95% CI: 16.86‐18.03). The largest excess mortality was observed for combinations that included substance use disorders. This study reports novel estimates related to the “force of comorbidity” and provides new insights into the contribution of substance use disorders to premature mortality in those with comorbid mental disorders.     

A meta‐review of “lifestyle psychiatry”: the role of exercise,smoking, diet and sleep in the prevention and treatment of mental disorders

There is increasing academic and clinical interest in how “lifestyle factors” traditionally associated with physical health may also relate to mental health and psychological well‐being. In response, international and national health bodies are producing guidelines to address health behaviors in the prevention and treatment of mental illness. However, the current evidence for the causal role of lifestyle factors in the onset and prognosis of mental disorders is unclear. We performed a systematic meta‐review of the top‐tier evidence examining how physical activity, sleep, dietary patterns and tobacco smoking impact on the risk and treatment outcomes across a range of mental disorders. Results from 29 meta‐analyses of prospective/cohort studies, 12 Mendelian randomization studies, two meta‐reviews, and two meta‐analyses of randomized controlled trials were synthesized to generate overviews of the evidence for targeting each of the specific lifestyle factors in the prevention and treatment of depression, anxiety and stress‐related disorders, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Standout findings include: a) convergent evidence indicating the use of physical activity in primary prevention and clinical treatment across a spectrum of mental disorders; b) emerging evidence implicating tobacco smoking as a causal factor in onset of both common and severe mental illness; c) the need to clearly establish causal relations between dietary patterns and risk of mental illness, and how diet should be best addressed within mental health care; and d) poor sleep as a risk factor for mental illness, although with further research required to understand the complex, bidirectional relations and the benefits of non‐pharmacological sleep‐focused interventions. The potentially shared neurobiological pathways between multiple lifestyle factors and mental health are discussed, along with directions for future research, and recommendations for the implementation of these findings at public health and clinical service levels.     

Has increased provision of treatment reduced the prevalence of common mental disorders? Review of the evidence from four countries

Many people identified as having common mental disorders in community surveys do not receive treatment. Modelling has suggested that closing this “treatment gap” should reduce the population prevalence of those disorders. To evaluate the effects of reducing the treatment gap in industrialized countries, data from 1990 to 2015 were reviewed from four English‐speaking countries: Australia, Canada, England and the US. These data show that the prevalence of mood and anxiety disorders and symptoms has not decreased, despite substantial increases in the provision of treatment, particularly antidepressants. Several hypotheses for this lack of improvement were considered. There was no support for the hypothesis that reductions in prevalence due to treatment have been masked by increases in risk factors. However, there was little evidence relevant to the hypothesis that improvements have been masked by increased reporting of symptoms because of greater public awareness of common mental disorders or willingness to disclose. A more strongly supported hypothesis for the lack of improvement is that much of the treatment provided does not meet the minimal standards of clinical practice guidelines and is not targeted optimally to those in greatest need. Lack of attention to prevention of common mental disorders may also be a factor. Reducing the prevalence of common mental disorders remains an unsolved challenge for health systems globally, which may require greater attention to the “quality gap” and “prevention gap”. There is also a need for nations to monitor outcomes by using standardized measures of service provision and mental disorders over time.     

The ICD‐11 developmental field study of reliability of diagnoses of high‐burden mental disorders: results among adult patients in mental health settings of 13 countries

Reliable, clinically useful, and globally applicable diagnostic classification of mental disorders is an essential foundation for global mental health. The World Health Organization (WHO) is nearing completion of the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD‐11). The present study assessed inter‐diagnostician reliability of mental disorders accounting for the greatest proportion of global disease burden and the highest levels of service utilization – schizophrenia and other primary psychotic disorders, mood disorders, anxiety and fear‐related disorders, and disorders specifically associated with stress – among adult patients presenting for treatment at 28 participating centers in 13 countries. A concurrent joint‐rater design was used, focusing specifically on whether two clinicians, relying on the same clinical information, agreed on the diagnosis when separately applying the ICD‐11 diagnostic guidelines. A total of 1,806 patients were assessed by 339 clinicians in the local language. Intraclass kappa coefficients for diagnoses weighted by site and study prevalence ranged from 0.45 (dysthymic disorder) to 0.88 (social anxiety disorder) and would be considered moderate to almost perfect for all diagnoses. Overall, the reliability of the ICD‐11 diagnostic guidelines was superior to that previously reported for equivalent ICD‐10 guidelines. These data provide support for the suitability of the ICD‐11 diagnostic guidelines for implementation at a global level. The findings will inform further revision of the ICD‐11 diagnostic guidelines prior to their publication and the development of programs to support professional training and implementation of the ICD‐11 by WHO member states.     

Efficacy of Biofeedback-Based Treatments for Temporomandibular Disorders

Bibliographic searches identified 14 controlled and uncontrolled outcome evaluations of biofeedback-based treatments for temporomandibular disorders published since 1978. This literature includes two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of each of three types of biofeedback treatment: (1) surface electromyographic (SEMG) training of the masticatory muscles, (2) SEMG training combined with adjunctive cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) techniques, and (3) biofeedback-assisted relaxation training (BART). A detailed review of these six RCTs, supplemented with information from non-RCT findings, was conducted to determine the extent to which each type of intervention met treatment efficacy criteria promulgated by the Association for Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback (AAPB). We conclude that SEMG training with adjunctive CBT is an efficacious treatment for temporomandibular disorders and that both SEMG training as the sole intervention and BART are probably efficacious treatments. We discuss guidelines for designing and reporting research in this area and suggest possible directions for future studies.     

How effective are cognitive behavior therapies for major depression and anxiety disorders? A meta‐analytic update of the evidence

We report the current best estimate of the effects of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) in the treatment of major depression (MDD), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), panic disorder (PAD) and social anxiety disorder (SAD), taking into account publication bias, the quality of trials, and the influence of waiting list control groups on the outcomes. In our meta‐analyses, we included randomized trials comparing CBT with a control condition (waiting list, care‐as‐usual or pill placebo) in the acute treatment of MDD, GAD, PAD or SAD, diagnosed on the basis of a structured interview. We found that the overall effects in the 144 included trials (184 comparisons) for all four disorders were large, ranging from g=0.75 for MDD to g=0.80 for GAD, g=0.81 for PAD, and g=0.88 for SAD. Publication bias mostly affected the outcomes of CBT in GAD (adjusted g=0.59) and MDD (adjusted g=0.65), but not those in PAD and SAD. Only 17.4% of the included trials were considered to be high‐quality, and this mostly affected the outcomes for PAD (g=0.61) and SAD (g=0.76). More than 80% of trials in anxiety disorders used waiting list control groups, and the few studies using other control groups pointed at much smaller effect sizes for CBT. We conclude that CBT is probably effective in the treatment of MDD, GAD, PAD and SAD; that the effects are large when the control condition is waiting list, but small to moderate when it is care‐as‐usual or pill placebo; and that, because of the small number of high‐quality trials, these effects are still uncertain and should be considered with caution.     

Association of preceding psychosis risk states and non‐psychotic mental disorders with incidence of clinical psychosis in the general population: a prospective study in the NEMESIS‐2 cohort

The validity and clinical utility of the concept of “clinical high risk” (CHR) for psychosis have so far been investigated only in risk‐enriched samples in clinical settings. In this population‐based prospective study, we aimed – for the first time – to assess the incidence rate of clinical psychosis and es­timate the population attributable fraction (PAF) of that incidence for preceding psychosis risk states and DSM‐IV diagnoses of non‐psychotic mental disorders (mood disorders, anxiety disorders, alcohol use disorders, and drug use disorders). All analyses were adjusted for age, gender and education. The incidence rate of clinical psychosis was 63.0 per 100,000 person‐years. The mutually‐adjusted Cox proportional hazards model indicated that preceding diagnoses of mood disorders (hazard ratio, HR=10.67, 95% CI: 3.12‐36.49), psychosis high‐risk state (HR=7.86, 95% CI: 2.76‐22.42) and drug use disorders (HR=5.33, 95% CI: 1.61‐17.64) were associated with an increased risk for clinical psychosis incidence. Of the clinical psychosis incidence in the population, 85.5% (95% CI: 64.6‐94.1) was attributable to prior psychopathology, with mood disorders (PAF=66.2, 95% CI: 33.4‐82.9), psychosis high‐risk state (PAF=36.9, 95% CI: 11.3‐55.1), and drug use disorders (PAF=18.7, 95% CI: –0.9 to 34.6) as the most important factors. Although the psychosis high‐risk state displayed a high relative risk for clinical psychosis outcome even after adjusting for other psychopathology, the PAF was comparatively low, given the low prevalence of psychosis high‐risk states in the population. These findings provide empirical evidence for the “prevention paradox” of targeted CHR early intervention. A comprehensive prevention strategy with a focus on broader psychopathology may be more effective than the current psychosis‐focused approach for achieving population‐based improvements in prevention of psychotic disorders.     

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Fluoxetine as Adjuncts to Group Behavioral Therapy for Binge Eating Disorder

Objective: Although binge eating disorder is a common and distressing concomitant of obesity, it has not yet been established whether affected individuals presenting to behavioral weight control programs should receive specialized treatments to supplement standard treatment. This study was designed to examine the added benefit of two adjunctive interventions, individual cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and fluoxetine, offered in the context of group behavioral weight control treatment. Research Methods and Procedures: One hundred sixteen overweight/obese women and men with binge eating disorder were all assigned to receive a 16‐session group behavioral weight control treatment over 20 weeks. Simultaneously, subjects were randomly assigned to receive CBT + fluoxetine, CBT + placebo, fluoxetine, or placebo in a two‐by‐two factorial design. Outcome measures, assessed at the end of the 16‐session acute treatment phase, included binge frequency, weight, and measures of eating‐related and general psychopathology. Results: Overall, subjects showed substantial improvement in binge eating and both general and eating‐related psychopathology, but little weight loss. Subjects who received individual CBT improved more in binge frequency than did those not receiving CBT (p < 0.001), and binge abstinence was significantly more common in subjects receiving CBT vs. those who did not (62% vs. 33%, p < 0.001). Fluoxetine treatment was associated with greater reduction in depressive symptoms (p < 0.05). The 54 subjects who achieved binge abstinence improved more on all measures than the 62 subjects who did not. In particular, these subjects lost, on average, 6.2 kg compared with a gain of 0.7 kg among non‐abstainers. Discussion: Adjunctive individual CBT results in significant additional binge reduction in obese binge eaters receiving standard behavioral weight control treatment.     

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for depression in children and adolescents: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis

Previous meta-analyses of psychotherapies for child and adolescent depression were limited because of the small number of trials with direct comparisons between two treatments. A network meta-analysis, a novel approach that integrates direct and indirect evidence from randomized controlled studies, was undertaken to investigate the comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for depression in children and adolescents. Systematic searches resulted in 52 studies (total N=3805) of nine psychotherapies and four control conditions. We assessed the efficacy at post-treatment and at follow-up, as well as the acceptability (all-cause discontinuation) of psychotherapies and control conditions. At post-treatment, only interpersonal therapy (IPT) and cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) were significantly more effective than most control conditions (standardized mean differences, SMDs ranged from −0.47 to −0.96). Also, IPT and CBT were more beneficial than play therapy. Only psychodynamic therapy and play therapy were not significantly superior to waitlist. At follow-up, IPT and CBT were significantly more effective than most control conditions (SMDs ranged from −0.26 to −1.05), although only IPT retained this superiority at both short-term and long-term follow-up. In addition, IPT and CBT were more beneficial than problem-solving therapy. Waitlist was significantly inferior to other control conditions. With regard to acceptability, IPT and problem-solving therapy had significantly fewer all-cause discontinuations than cognitive therapy and CBT (ORs ranged from 0.06 to 0.33). These data suggest that IPT and CBT should be considered as the best available psychotherapies for depression in children and adolescents. However, several alternative psychotherapies are understudied in this age group. Waitlist may inflate the effect of psychotherapies, so that psychological placebo or treatment-as-usual may be preferable as a control condition in psychotherapy trials.