The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The effects of psychotherapies for major depression in adults on remission, recovery and improvement: A meta-analysis
Abstract
Background Standardised effect sizes have been criticized because they are difficult to interpret and offer little clinical information. This meta-analyses examine the extent of actual improvement, the absolute numbers of patients no longer meeting criteria for major depression, and absolute rates of response and remission.Methods We conducted a meta-analysis of 92 studies with 181 conditions (134 psychotherapy and 47 control conditions) with 6937 patients meeting criteria for major depressive disorder. Within these conditions, we calculated the absolute number of patients no longer meeting criteria for major depression, rates of response and remission, and the absolute reduction on the BDI, BDI-II, and HAM-D.Results After treatment, 62% of patients no longer met criteria for MDD in the psychotherapy conditions. However, 43% of participants in the control conditions and 48% of people in the care-as-usual conditions no longer met criteria for MDD, suggesting that the additional value of psychotherapy compared to care-as-usual would be 14%. For response and remission, comparable results were found, with less than half of the patients meeting criteria for response and remission after psychotherapy. Additionally, a considerable proportion of response and remission was also found in control conditions. In the psychotherapy conditions, scores on the BDI were reduced by 13.42 points, 15.12 points on the BDI-II, and 10.28 points on the HAM-D. In the control conditions, these reductions were 4.56, 4.68, and 5.29.Discussion Psychotherapy contributes to improvement in depressed patients, but improvement in control conditions is also considerable.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“Однако психотерапевтические интервенции при депрессивных и тревожных расстройствах тоже оказываются неэффективны для 50% пациентов [6].”
From Positive-Dialogue Psychotherapy Outcome Predictors in Patients with General Anxiety Disorder and Mixed Anxiety and Depressive Disorder (2024) · cites this paper as [6]
In the citing paper
“but are ineffective for as many as 50% of patients (Cuijpers et al., 2014; Loerinc et al., 2015).”
From Meta-analyses of the neural mechanisms and predictors of response to psychotherapy in depression and anxiety (2018) · cites this paper as Cuijpers et al., 2014
In the citing paper
“approximating response rates achieved on primary symptom outcomes in empirically established psychosocial treatments for anxiety (Loerinc et al., 2015) and depression (Cuijpers et al., 2014).”
From Enhancing social connectedness in anxiety and depression through amplification of positivity: Preliminary treatment outcomes and process of change (2020) · cites this paper as Cuijpers et al., 2014
Citations
Cites
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 · Cited by 63,139
An inventory for measuring depression
BECK, A. T. (1961) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1961.01710120031004 · Cited by 38,032
Hamilton, M. (1960) · Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry · doi:10.1136/jnnp.23.1.56 · Cited by 32,817
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009) · doi:10.1002/9780470743386 · Cited by 14,225
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021) · doi:10.1002/9781119558378 · Cited by 9,799
Frank, E. (1991) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1991.01810330075011 · Cited by 1,959
An Assessment of Clinically Useful Measures of the Consequences of Treatment
Laupacis, A., Sackett, D. L., & Roberts, R. S. (1988) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm198806303182605 · Cited by 1,681
Uncertainty in heterogeneity estimates in meta-analyses
Ioannidis, J. P. A., Patsopoulos, N. A., & Evangelou, E. (2007) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.39343.408449.80 · Cited by 1,254
Cuijpers, P., Berking, M., Andersson, G., Quigley, L., Kleiboer, A., & Dobson, K. S. (2013) · The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/070674371305800702 · Cited by 1,066
Self-citationPsychotherapy for depression in adults: A meta-analysis of comparative outcome studies.
Cuijpers, P., van Straten, A., Andersson, G., & van Oppen, P. (2008) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0013075 · Cited by 1,050
Self-citation
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Malhi, G. S., & Mann, J. J. (2018) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(18)31948-2 · Cited by 4,099
Malhi, G. S., Bassett, D., Boyce, P., Bryant, R., Fitzgerald, P. B., Fritz, K., Hopwood, M., Lyndon, B., Mulder, R., Murray, G., et al. (2015) · Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/0004867415617657 · Cited by 842
“This conclusion is underlined by a recent meta-analysis of 10 relevant studies, which found the effect size of psychotherapy compared with pill placebo to be d = 0.25 (NNT = 7.14), which is comparable to the effects of antidepressant versus pill placebo (Cuijpers et al., 2014b).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialCuijpers, P., Cristea, I. A., Karyotaki, E., Reijnders, M., & Huibers, M. J. H. (2016) · World Psychiatry · doi:10.1002/wps.20346 · Cited by 572
Self-citationLeichsenring, F., Steinert, C., Rabung, S., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2022) · World Psychiatry · doi:10.1002/wps.20941 · Cited by 485
Depression in the Primary Care Setting
Park, L. T., & Zarate, C. A. (2019) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmcp1712493 · Cited by 504
Metadata
- Authors
- Cuijpers, P., Karyotaki, E., Weitz, E., Andersson, G., Hollon, S. D., & van Straten, A.
- Affiliations
- Leuphana University of Lüneburg (DE)
- Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
- Linköping University (SE)
- Vanderbilt University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Cuijpers, Pim
- Venue
- Journal of Affective Disorders
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-04
- Volume
- 159
- Pages
- 118-126
- ISSN
- 0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2141305471
- Semantic Scholar
- f373e105af3f5363f14fc4a4eb88392a9bf0eafa
- Cited by
- 586
- References
- 31
- Citations by year
- 2026: 53 · 2025: 84 · 2024: 65 · 2023: 47 · 2022: 46 · 2021: 87 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 6
- FWCI
- 4.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Multilingual Matters (Channel View Publications) (submittedVersion)
- VU Research Portal (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Treatment of Major Depression
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Keywords
- major depressive disorder, psychotherapy, remission, response rate, usual care, Beck Depression Inventory, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Major Depressive Disorder, Humans, Psychotherapy, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome
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