Cited by 15Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsBipolar Disorder and Treatment

Are recommendations for psychological treatment of borderline personality disorder in current UK guidelines justified? Systematic review and subgroup analysis: Impact of treatment process on outcomes of BPD

Omar, Hussein, Tejerina-Arreal, Maria, Crawford, Mike J.·2014·Personality and Mental Health

Abstract

Current U.K. guidelines on the management of borderline personality disorder include specific recommendations about the duration of therapy and number of sessions per week that patients should be offered. However, very little research has been conducted to examine the impact of these aspects of treatment process on patient outcomes. We therefore undertook a systematic review to examine the impact of treatment duration, number of sessions per week and access group-based therapy on general mental health, depression, social functioning and deliberate self-harm. We identified 25 randomized trials for possible inclusion in the review. However, differences in outcome measures used meant that only 12 studies could be included in the analysis. Statistically significant reductions in self-harm and depression and improvement in social functioning were found for treatments that include more than one session per week and those that included group-based sessions but were not found for those that deliver in individual sessions or one or fewer sessions per week. Longer term outcomes of short-term interventions have not been examined. Further research is needed to examine the impact of shorter term interventions and to compare the effects of group-based versus individual therapies for people with borderline personality disorder.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/pmh.1264

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Omar, H., Tejerina-Arreal, M., & Crawford, M. J.
Affiliations
  • Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • Facultad de Psicología; Universidad de Murcia; Mucia Spain
  • Centre for Mental Health (GB)
Corresponding author
Crawford, Mike J.
Venue
Personality and Mental Health
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-07-02
Volume
8
Issue
3
Pages
228-237
ISSN
1932-8621 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1819346599
Cited by
15
References
32
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1
FWCI
0.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Personality and Mental Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
Keywords
borderline personality disorder, psychological intervention, treatment duration, individual psychotherapy, depression, self-harm, social functioning, general mental health
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Mental Disorders, Borderline Personality Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Humans, Middle Aged, Psychotherapy, Psychotherapy, Group, Social Behavior, Time Factors, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Self-Injurious Behavior, Treatment Outcome, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Young Adult

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