Evaluating the mechanisms of change in motivational interviewing in the treatment of mental health problems: A review and meta-analysis
Abstract
Motivational interviewing (MI) has proven useful in the treatment of a variety of mental health problems, however the mechanisms of MI's success within these populations remain unknown. This review is a first attempt to investigate and meta-analyse MI mechanisms of change research conducted with participants who suffer mood, anxiety, psychotic, eating disorders, and comorbid conditions. Twenty studies met inclusion criteria and examined a range of potential MI mechanisms, including patient motivation and confidence, patient resistance, and engagement. Results indicated that while MI did not increase patient motivation more so than did comparison conditions, MI showed a favourable effect on patient engagement variables. However, medium to high levels of heterogeneity were detected for patient engagement, indicating significant differences between studies. Heterogeneity was somewhat explained through subgroup analyses examining the effect of comparison condition and participant diagnosis. Overall, there were few MI mechanisms of change available for review, though the results suggest that patient engagement with treatment may be a potential mechanism of change in populations diagnosed with anxiety, mood, and psychotic disorders.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The meta-analysis provided no data on patient satisfaction.
“The meta-analysis provided no data on patient satisfaction, which, as noted, was the only significant finding in the present trial.”
A recent meta-analysis found that MI did not result in greater increases in patient motivation compared to a minimal control condition, with a small and non-significant mean weighted effect size (d = 0.18, 95% CI [−0.05 to 0.42], p = 0.125).
“Regarding patient motivation, MI did not result in greater increases in patient motivation when compared to a minimal control condition (7/12 studies), and the mean weighted effect size for the effect of MI on patient motivation was small and non-significant (d = 0.18, 95% CI [− 0.05 to 0.42], p = 0.125).”
The meta-analysis found that regarding patient self-efficacy, the pooled effect size was negligible and non-significant (d = 0.04, 95% CI [−0.54 to 0.62], p = 0.888).
“Likewise, regarding patient self-efficacy, the pooled effect size was negligible and non-significant (d = 0.04, 95% CI [− 0.54 to 0.62], p = 0.888).”
The meta-analysis found that regarding adherence to future therapy, the majority of included studies (11/16) found that patients receiving MI attended more treatment than those in a control condition (mean weighted effect size d = 0.38, 95% CI [0.08 to 0.67], p = 0.012).
“Lastly, regarding adherence to future therapy, the majority of included studies (11/16 studies) found that patients receiving MI attended more treatment than those in a control condition (mean weighted effect size d = 0.38, 95% CI [0.08 to 0.67], p = 0.012).”
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 59 · Cited by 95
- Authors
- Romano, M., & Peters, L.
- Affiliations
- Macquarie University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Romano, Mia
- ORCID
- Peters, Lorna
- Venue
- Clinical Psychology Review
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-06
- Volume
- 38
- Pages
- 1-12
- ISSN
- 0272-7358 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2051998798
- Cited by
- 95
- References
- 59
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 3 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 1.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Clinical Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Counseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
- Keywords
- motivational interviewing, mechanisms of change, psychotherapy, patient engagement, patient motivation, patient resistance, mood disorders, anxiety disorders, psychosis, eating disorders, comorbidities
- MeSH terms
- Mental Disorders, Humans, Mental Health, Motivation, Motivational Interviewing
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
