CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 599Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology ResearchPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effectiveness of Long-term Psychodynamic Psychotherapy: A Meta-analysis

Leichsenring, Falk·2008·JAMA
DOI 10.1001/jama.300.13.1551
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

THE PLACE OF PSYCHOANALYTIC and psychodynamic treatments within psychiatry is controversial. Although some evidence supports the efficacy of short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy (STPP) for specific disorders, convincing research on the outcome of long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy (LTPP) has been lacking. Evidence suggests that short-term psychotherapy is sufficiently effective for most individuals experiencing acute distress. Evidence, however, also indicates that short-term treatments are insufficient for a considerable proportion of patients with complex mental disorders, ie, patients with multiple or chronic mental disorders or personality disorders. Some studies suggest that long-term psychotherapy may be helpful for these groups of patients. This is true not only of psychodynamic therapy but also of psychotherapeutic approaches that are usually short-term, such as cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). Evidence-based treatments for these patient groups are particularly important. Personality disorders, for example, are quite common in both general and clinical populations. They show a high comorbidity with a wide range of Axis I psychiatric disorders and are significantly associated with functional impairments. Furthermore, a high proportion of patients in clinical populations expeFor editorial comment see p 1587. Author Affiliations: Department of Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, University of Giessen, Giessen (Dr Leichsenring); and Department of Medical Psychology, Univers i ty Medica l Center HamburgEppendorf, Hamburg (Dr Rabung), Germany. Corresponding Author: Falk Leichsenring, DSc, Department of Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, University of Giessen, Ludwigstrasse 76, 35392 Giessen Germany (falk.leichsenring@psycho.med .uni-giessen.de). Context The place of long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy (LTPP) within psychiatry is controversial. Convincing outcome research for LTPP has been lacking.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.300.13.1551

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 599

Metadata

Authors
Leichsenring, F.
Affiliations
American Medical Association (US)
Corresponding author
Leichsenring, Falk
ORCID
Leichsenring, Falk
Venue
JAMA
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
2008-10-01
Volume
300
Issue
13
Pages
1551
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
DOI
10.1001/jama.300.13.1551
OpenAlex
W1538112934
Cited by
65
References
0
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 5
FWCI
10.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
JAMA (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
Keywords
long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy, treatment effectiveness, personality disorders, complex mental disorders, chronic mental illness, comorbidities, functional disability, outcomes research, evidence-based treatment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review