CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 655Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 70 of the 72 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 27 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Efficacy of Psychotherapies for Borderline Personality Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Open access
Cristea, Ioana A., Gentili, Claudio, Cotet, Carmen D., Palomba, Daniela, Barbui, Corrado, Cuijpers, Pim·2017·JAMA Psychiatry
DOI 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2016.4287
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a debilitating condition, but several psychotherapies are considered effective. OBJECTIVE: To conduct an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials to assess the efficacy of psychotherapies for BPD populations. DATA SOURCES: Search terms were combined for borderline personality and randomized trials in PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (from database inception to November 2015), as well as the reference lists of earlier meta-analyses. STUDY SELECTION: Included were randomized clinical trials of adults with diagnosed BPD randomized to psychotherapy exclusively or to a control intervention. Study selection differentiated stand-alone designs (in which an independent psychotherapy was compared with control interventions) from add-on designs (in which an experimental intervention added to usual treatment was compared with usual treatment alone). DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data extraction coded characteristics of trials, participants, and interventions and assessed risk of bias using 4 domains of the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias tool (independent extraction by 2 assessors). Outcomes were pooled using a random-effects model. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses were conducted. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Standardized mean differences (Hedges g) were calculated using all outcomes reported in the trials for borderline symptoms, self-harm, suicide, health service use, and general psychopathology at posttest and follow-up. Differential treatment retention at posttest was analyzed, reporting odds ratios. RESULTS: Thirty-three trials (2256 participants) were included. For borderline-relevant outcomes combined (symptoms, self-harm, and suicide) at posttest, the investigated psychotherapies were moderately more effective than control interventions in stand-alone designs (g = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.14-0.51) and add-on designs (g = 0.40; 95% CI, 0.15-0.65). Results were similar for other outcomes, including stand-alone designs: self-harm (g = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.09-0.54), suicide (g = 0.44; 95% CI, 0.15-0.74), health service use (g = 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22-0.58), and general psychopathology (g = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.09-0.55), with no differences between design types. There were no significant differences in the odds ratios for treatment retention (1.32; 95% CI, 0.87-2.00 for stand-alone designs and 1.01; 95% CI, 0.55-1.87 for add-on designs). Thirteen trials reported borderline-relevant outcomes at follow-up (g = 0.45; 95% CI, 0.15-0.75). Dialectical behavior therapy (g = 0.34; 95% CI, 0.15-0.53) and psychodynamic approaches (g = 0.41; 95% CI, 0.12-0.69) were the only types of psychotherapies more effective than control interventions. Risk of bias was a significant moderator in subgroup and meta-regression analyses (slope β = -0.16; 95% CI, -0.29 to -0.03; P = .02). Publication bias was persistent, particularly for follow-up. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Psychotherapies, most notably dialectical behavior therapy and psychodynamic approaches, are effective for borderline symptoms and related problems. Nonetheless, effects are small, inflated by risk of bias and publication bias, and particularly unstable at follow-up.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This updated systematic review and meta-analysis of 33 RCTs (2256 adults with BPD) found that psychotherapies produced small posttest benefits over control for borderline-relevant outcomes (all trials g=0.35; 95% CI, 0.20-0.50), with dialectical behavior therapy and psychodynamic approaches effective. Effects were attenuated by risk of bias and publication bias and became unstable/nonsignificant at follow-up after adjustment.

Key findings

  • Across 33 trials (2256 participants), posttest borderline-relevant outcomes favored psychotherapy: stand-alone designs g=0.32 (95% CI, 0.14-0.51); add-on designs g=0.40 (95% CI, 0.15-0.65); all trials combined g=0.35 (95% CI, 0.20-0.50; 27 trials).
  • In stand-alone designs, effects were significant for self-harm g=0.32 (95% CI, 0.09-0.54), suicide g=0.44 (95% CI, 0.15-0.74), health service use g=0.40 (95% CI, 0.22-0.58), and general psychopathology g=0.32 (95% CI, 0.09-0.55); treatment retention was not significantly different (OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.87-2.00 for stand-alone; OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.55-1.87 for add-on).
  • Only DBT (g=0.34; 95% CI, 0.15-0.53) and psychodynamic approaches (g=0.41; 95% CI, 0.12-0.69) were significantly more effective than control; CBT (g=0.24; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.49) and other interventions (g=0.38; 95% CI, -0.15 to 0.92) were not.
  • Follow-up effects were significant across 13 trials (g=0.45; 95% CI, 0.15-0.75), but risk of bias moderated outcomes (slope β=-0.16; 95% CI, -0.29 to -0.03; P=.02), with low-RoB trials (3-4 domains) showing g=0.11 (95% CI, -0.12 to 0.35) versus g=0.48 (95% CI, 0.33-0.64) for 0-2 domains (P=.01); trim-and-fill reduced posttest g from 0.35 to 0.23 (95% CI, 0.07-0.38) and made follow-up nonsignificant (g=0.19; 95% CI, -0.15 to 0.53).

Methods

  • Systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs identified from PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (inception to November 2015) plus reference lists; included adults with diagnosed BPD randomized to psychotherapy exclusively or to a control intervention, excluding adolescent/partially adolescent samples, head-to-head comparisons of BPD-specific therapies, and trials with standardized combined medication protocols.
  • Included 33 trials (2256 participants; 1169 treatment, 1087 control): 22 stand-alone and 11 add-on designs; DBT (12 trials), psychodynamic (8), CBT (5); control was TAU in 21 trials and manualized in 10; treatment developer was an author in 20 trials.
  • Random-effects meta-analysis calculated Hedges g for outcome categories at posttest and follow-up, odds ratios for treatment retention, subgroup and meta-regression analyses, Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment across 4 domains, and publication-bias assessment via funnel plots, trim-and-fill, and Egger test.

Limitations

  • Stated in the paper: some outcome categories or subgroups included few trials; 5 trials lacked data needed for effect-size calculation; most trials were not registered, so selective outcome reporting could not be rated; the search may have missed trials; therapies were grouped into broad categories, effacing subtler differences; schema-focused therapy was underrepresented; and adjunct medication use was neither standardized nor consistently reported.
  • Stated in the paper: effects were small, inflated by publication bias, and particularly unstable at follow-up; effects were no longer sustained in trials with low risk of bias.
  • Evident from the text: heterogeneity was moderate to high across many analyses (e.g., 70% for all-trial follow-up borderline-relevant outcomes and 79% for add-on follow-up), and several key findings rested on small numbers of trials, making some estimates tentative.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2016.4287

Cites

70 of 70 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 27 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 60 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 26
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 8
31 of 31

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Most trials that showed effectiveness had the treatment developer directly involved.

    “However, most trials demonstrating effectiveness were conducted with the direct participation of the treatment developer.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Grouping different psychotherapies into broad categories yields meaningful and comparable efficacy estimates.

    “Conversely, because effectiveness differences between therapies appear to be limited and because variations of the same intervention are to be expected in diverse implementation settings, we believe that a broader effectiveness evaluation grouping therapies into theoretically intelligible categories is germane.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The control conditions across included trials are sufficiently comparable to be pooled as a single control category.

    “No constraints were placed on the control group, which could include (but was not restricted to) TAU or other treatments not specifically developed for BPD.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The Cochrane risk-of-bias domains and the summed overall score adequately capture bias in psychotherapy trials.

    “Trial risk of bias (RoB) was evaluated within 4 domains of the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias tool, 26 which assesses sources of bias in RCTs.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Treatment retention is a valid indicator of treatment acceptability or effectiveness.

    “Treatment retention was computed as the comparative dropout rates between the intervention and control groups.”
5 of 5

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Follow-up heterogeneity is called high below the paper's stated threshold

    Minor

    The methods identify 75% as the threshold for high heterogeneity, but the results describe follow-up heterogeneity of 70% as high. The stand-alone follow-up result is likewise called high at 62%.

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 72 references

2 of the 72 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Hedges LV, Olkin I. Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press; 1985.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 501–600 of 655

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Cristea, I. A., Gentili, C., Cotet, C. D., Palomba, D., Barbui, C., & Cuijpers, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Padua (IT)
  • Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
  • University of Verona (IT)
  • Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
Corresponding author
Cristea, Ioana A.
ORCID
Venue
JAMA Psychiatry
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
2017-04-01
Volume
74
Issue
4
Pages
319
ISSN
2168-622X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2016.4287
OpenAlex
W2592963919
Semantic Scholar
464a03e120510e87d9085d8a94d7e412e2f34bbd
Cited by
655
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 48 · 2025: 57 · 2024: 64 · 2023: 60 · 2022: 76 · 2021: 86 · 2020: 102 · 2019: 80 · 2018: 59 · 2017: 22
FWCI
10.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Padua Research Archive (University of Padova) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • National Authority for Scientific Research and Innovation
  • Università degli Studi di Padova
  • Autoritatea Natională pentru Cercetare Stiintifică
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
borderline personality disorder, psychotherapy efficacy, dialectical behavior therapy, transference-focused psychotherapy, self-harm, suicide, borderline symptoms, treatment retention, health care utilization, general psychopathology, risk of bias, subgroup analysis, meta-regression, risk of bias in meta-analysis
MeSH terms
Suicide Prevention, Behavior Therapy, Borderline Personality Disorder, Humans, Psychotherapy, Suicide, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Self-Injurious Behavior, Treatment Outcome, Psychotherapy, Psychodynamic

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-08, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-08 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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