Cited by 33Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPsychological Treatments and Assessments

Predictors of CBT outcome in older adults with GAD

Open access
Hundt, Natalie E., Amspoker, Amber B., Kraus-Schuman, Cynthia, Cully, Jeffrey A., Rhoades, Howard, Kunik, Mark E., Stanley, Melinda A.·2014·Journal of Anxiety Disorders

Abstract

The current study is a secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial of CBT for late-life GAD (Stanley et al., 2014) which provided an opportunity to examine predictors of outcome among those who received CBT. Participants were 150 older adults who were randomized to receive 10 sessions of CBT. Completer analyses found that homework completion, number of sessions attended, lower worry severity, lower depression severity, and recruitment site predicted 6-month worry outcome on the PSWQ-A, whereas homework completion, credibility of the therapy, lower anxiety severity, and site predicted 6-month anxiety outcome on the STAI-T. In intent-to-treat multivariate analyses, however, only initial worry and anxiety severity, site, and number of sessions completed predicted treatment outcome. These results are largely consistent with predictors of outcome in younger adults and suggest that lower initial symptom severity and variables consistent with greater engagement in treatment predict outcome.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.janxdis.2014.09.012

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 an analysis restricted to the two CBT arms, subsample predicted response: community CBT recipients improved more in anxiety and worry than Veteran CBT recipients.

    “A secondary examination of only data from the two CBT conditions found that subsample (community vs. Veteran participants) was a predictor of treatment response, such that community participants receiving CBT showed greater improvements in anxiety and worry symptoms than Veteran participants receiving CBT (Hundt et al., 2014)”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Barrera TL Cully JA Amspoker AB Wilson NL Masozera N Kunik ME Stanley MA CBT for Late-life GAD: Similarities and Differences between Veteran and Community Participants 3 2014 Symposium to be presented at the annual meeting of the Anxiety and Depression Association of America Chicago, IL
  2. First MB Spitzer RL Miriam G Williams JBW Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV axis I disorders, research version, patient edition with psychotic 1997 Biometrics Research, New York State Psychiatric Institute New York
  3. Shrestha S Armento MEA Bush AL Huddleston C Zeno D Jameson JP Stanley MA Pilot findings from a community-based treatment program for late-life anxiety International Journal of Person Centered Medicine in press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hundt, N. E., Amspoker, A. B., Kraus-Schuman, C., Cully, J. A., Rhoades, H., Kunik, M. E., & Stanley, M. A.
Affiliations
  • Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center (US)
  • The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (US)
Corresponding author
Hundt, Natalie E.
Venue
Journal of Anxiety Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-12
Volume
28
Issue
8
Pages
845-850
ISSN
0887-6185 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2048103860
Cited by
33
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2
FWCI
3.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Anxiety Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH053932)
  • Department of Veterans Affairs South Central Mental Illness Research Education and Clinical Center (MIRECC)
  • VA HSR&D Houston Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety (no.13-413)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
Keywords
generalized anxiety disorder, older adults, cognitive behavioral therapy, predictors of treatment outcome, anxiety levels, homework completion, treatment engagement, late-life anxiety
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Anxiety Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Compliance, Surveys and Questionnaires, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Multivariate Analysis, Treatment Outcome, Self Report

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