CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 48

Predictors of treatment outcome in an effectiveness trial of cognitive behavioral therapy for children with anxiety disorders

Wergeland, Gro Janne H., Fjermestad, Krister W., Marin, Carla E., Bjelland, Ingvar, Haugland, Bente Storm Mowatt, Silverman, Wendy K., Öst, Lars-Göran, Bjaastad, Jon Fauskanger +3 more·2016·Behaviour Research and Therapy
DOI 10.1016/j.brat.2015.11.001
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A substantial number of children with anxiety disorders do not improve following cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). Recent effectiveness studies have found poorer outcome for CBT programs than what is typically found in efficacy studies. The present study examined predictors of treatment outcome among 181 children (aged 8-15 years), with separation anxiety, social phobia, or generalized anxiety disorder, who participated in a randomized, controlled effectiveness trial of a 10-session CBT program in community clinics. Potential predictors included baseline demographic, child, and parent factors. Outcomes were as follows: a) remission from all inclusion anxiety disorders; b) remission from the primary anxiety disorder; and c) child- and parent-rated reduction of anxiety symptoms at post-treatment and at 1-year follow-up. The most consistent findings across outcome measures and informants were that child-rated anxiety symptoms, functional impairment, a primary diagnosis of social phobia or separation anxiety disorder, and parent internalizing symptoms predicted poorer outcome at post-treatment. Child-rated anxiety symptoms, lower family social class, lower pretreatment child motivation, and parent internalizing symptoms predicted poorer outcome at 1-year follow-up. These results suggest that anxious children with more severe problems, and children of parents with elevated internalizing symptom levels, may be in need of modified, additional, or alternative interventions to achie…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.brat.2015.11.001

Cites

22 of 22 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
Wergeland, G. J. H., Fjermestad, K. W., Marin, C. E., Bjelland, I., Haugland, B. S. M., Silverman, W. K., Öst, L.-G., Bjaastad, J. F., Oeding, K., Havik, O. E., & Heiervang, E. R.
Venue
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-01
Volume
76
Pages
1-12
ISSN
0005-7967
DOI
10.1016/j.brat.2015.11.001
Cited by
48
References
22
Language
en
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Funders
  • Western Norway Regional Health Authority (911366, 911253)
  • Meltzer Research Foundation

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