CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 138Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPsychological Treatments and Assessments

One vs five sessions of exposure and five sessions of cognitive therapy in the treatment of claustrophobia

Öst, L.-G, Alm, T, Brandberg, M, Breitholtz, E·2001·Behaviour Research and Therapy
DOI 10.1016/s0005-7967(99)00176-x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Forty-six patients fulfilling the DSM-IV criteria for claustrophobia were assessed with behavioral, physiological, and self-report measures. They were randomly assigned to four conditions: (1) one-session (E1); or (2) five-sessions of exposure (E5); (3) five-sessions of cognitive therapy (C5); and (4) Wait-list for 5 weeks. The first condition consisted of a single 3 h session of massed exposure, and condition 2 and 3 of 5 h of gradual treatment, which was done individually by very experienced therapists. The results showed that treatment was significantly better than the wait-list condition, and the three treatments did equally well with no differences between them. At post-treatment 79% of treatment patients vs 18% of the wait-list controls had improved to a clinically significant extent. When the three treatments were compared 80% in the E1-group, 81% in the E5-group, and 79% in the C5-group were clinically improved. At the 1 year follow-up the corresponding figures were 100%, 81%, and 93%, respectively. The implications of these results are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0005-7967(99)00176-x

Cites

40 of 40 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?

  • One-session treatment for specific phobias yields outcomes comparable to five sessions, with gains maintained up to four years.

    “One-session treatment of flying phobia, blood-injection-injury phobia, spider phobia, claustrophobia, and other specific phobias has shown comparable outcomes to five-session treatment, with clinically significant improvements maintained for follow-up periods as long as four years (Öst, Alm, Brandberg, & Breitholtz, 2001; Öst, Brandberg, & Alm, 1997; Öst, Hellström, & Kåver, 1992).”

    From Enhancing Inhibitory Learning: The Utility of Variability in Exposure (2019) · cites this paper as Öst, Alm, Brandberg, & Breitholtz, 2001

  • There is no unambiguous evidence that CBT should outperform exposure therapy for phobias per se, with studies finding either no difference or a negligible advantage for either CBT or exposure therapy in phobias.

    “it should be noted that the intervention of the current trial included a number of CBT components and that there is no unambiguous evidence that CBT should outperform exposure therapy for phobias per se, with studies finding either no difference or a negligible advantage for either CBT of exposure therapy in phobias (eg, [14,19,59,60]).”

    From Short-term effectiveness of web-based guided self-help for phobic outpatients: randomized controlled trial. (2014) · cites this paper as [59]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Öst, L.-G., Alm, T., Brandberg, M., & Breitholtz, E.
Affiliations
  • Stockholm University (SE)
  • Uppsala University (SE)
Corresponding author
Öst, L.-G
ORCID
Öst, L.-G
Venue
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2001-02
Volume
39
Issue
2
Pages
167-183
ISSN
0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s0005-7967(99)00176-x
OpenAlex
W2041599078
Cited by
138
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 11
FWCI
5.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Vetenskapsrådet
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
claustrophobia, exposure therapy, cognitive therapy, gradual exposure, treatment comparison, waitlist control, long-term follow-up, anxiety disorders
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Desensitization, Psychologic, Female, Humans, Implosive Therapy, Male, Middle Aged, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Phobic Disorders, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy

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