Cited by 179Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

A systematic review of unified protocol applications with adult populations: facilitating widespread dissemination via adaptability

Cassiello-Robbins, Clair, Southward, Matthew W., Tirpak, Julianne Wilner, Sauer-Zavala, Shannon·2020·Clinical Psychology Review

Abstract

The Unified Protocol for Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders (UP) was designed to be a flexible, evidence-based intervention that could treat a wide range of emotional disorders. The purpose of this systematic review is to summarize (1) the range of presenting problems to which the UP has been applied with adult patients, and (2) the settings in which the protocol has been used, as well as any modifications made to it. Using PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a literature search of PsychInfo, PubMed, Proquest Dissertations and Theses, and Web of Science. The 77 studies included in this review indicated the UP has been applied to a wide range of presenting problems including anxiety, depressive, bipolar, traumatic-stressor, substance use, eating, borderline personality, insomnia, and physical health disorders. Additionally, the UP has been applied to non-diagnosable problems such as non-suicidal self-injury, subclinical presentations, and sexual minority stress. The strongest base of evidence for the UP is among Caucasian females in the United States with anxiety-related or depressive disorders. Numerous adaptions of the UP were present in the literature. Overall, results suggest the UP can be flexibly applied to a range of diagnostic presentations. However, many studies reviewed were preliminary and further research is needed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101852

Cites

59 of 59 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
Cassiello-Robbins, C., Southward, M. W., Tirpak, J. W., & Sauer-Zavala, S.
Affiliations
  • Duke Medical Center (US)
  • University of Kentucky (US)
Corresponding author
Cassiello-Robbins, Clair
Venue
Clinical Psychology Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-06
Volume
78
Pages
101852
ISSN
0272-7358 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3018886528
Cited by
179
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 5
FWCI
3.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
Unified Protocol, transdiagnostic treatment, emotional disorders, adults, dissemination, intervention adaptability, anxiety disorders, depression, bipolar disorder, trauma, substance use disorders, eating disorders, borderline personality disorder, insomnia, non-suicidal self-injury, sexual minority stress, treatment setting
MeSH terms
Affective Symptoms, Mental Disorders, Clinical Protocols, Humans, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Psychotherapy, Evidence-Based Practice

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