CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 259Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesTreatment of Major Depression

Cognitive behavioural therapy and short-term psychoanalytical psychotherapy versus a brief psychosocial intervention in adolescents with unipolar major depressive disorder (IMPACT): a multicentre, pragmatic, observer-blind, randomised controlled superiority trial

Open access
Goodyer, Ian M, Reynolds, Shirley, Barrett, Barbara, Byford, Sarah, Dubicka, Bernadka, Hill, Jonathan, Holland, Fiona, Kelvin, Raphael +7 more·2017·The Lancet Psychiatry
DOI 10.1016/s2215-0366(16)30378-9PMC PMC5285447
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Psychological treatments for adolescents with unipolar major depressive disorder are associated with diagnostic remission within 28 weeks in 65-70% of patients. We aimed to assess the medium-term effects and costs of psychological therapies on maintenance of reduced depression symptoms 12 months after treatment. METHODS: We did this multicentre, pragmatic, observer-blind, randomised controlled superiority trial (IMPACT) at 15 National Health Service child and adolescent mental health service (CAMHS) clinics in three regions in England. Adolescent patients (aged 11-17 years) with a diagnosis of DSM IV major depressive disorder were randomly assigned (1:1:1), via a web-based randomisation service, to receive cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) or short-term psychoanalytical therapy versus a reference brief psychological intervention. Randomisation was stochastically minimised by age, sex, self-reported depression sum score, and region. Patients and clinicians were aware of group allocation, but allocation was concealed from outcome assessors. Patients were followed up and reassessed at weeks 6, 12, 36, 52, and 86 post-randomisation. The primary outcome was self-reported depression symptoms at weeks 36, 52, and 86, as measured with the self-reported Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ). Because our aim was to compare the two psychological therapies with the brief psychosocial intervention, we first established whether CBT was inferior to short-term psychoanalytical psychotherapy for the same outcome. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN83033550. FINDINGS: Between June 29, 2010, and Jan 17, 2013, we randomly assigned 470 patients to receive the brief psychosocial intervention (n=158), CBT (n=155), or short-term psychoanalytical therapy (n=157); 465 patients comprised the intention-to-treat population. 392 (84%) patients had available data for primary analysis by the end of follow-up. Treatment fidelity and differentiation were established between the three interventions. The median number of treatment sessions differed significantly between patients in the brief psychosocial intervention group (n=6 [IQR 4-11]), CBT group (n=9 [5-14]), and short-term psychoanalytical therapy group (n=11 [5-23]; p<0·0001), but there was no difference between groups in the average duration of treatment (27·5 [SD 21·5], 24·9 [17·7], 27·9 [16·8] weeks, respectively; Kruskal-Wallis p=0·238). Self-reported depression symptoms did not differ significantly between patients given CBT and those given short-term psychoanalytical therapy at weeks 36 (treatment effect 0·179, 95% CI -3·731 to 4·088; p=0·929), 52 (0·307, -3·161 to 3·774; p=0·862), or 86 (0·578, -2·948 to 4·104; p=0·748). These two psychological treatments had no superiority effect compared with brief psychosocial intervention at weeks 36 (treatment effect -3·234, 95% CI -6·611 to 0·143; p=0·061), 52 (-2·806, -5·790 to 0·177; p=0·065), or 86 (-1·898, -4·922 to 1·126; p=0·219). Physical adverse events (self-reported breathing problems, sleep disturbances, drowsiness or tiredness, nausea, sweating, and being restless or overactive) did not differ between the groups. Total costs of the trial interventions did not differ significantly between treatment groups. INTERPRETATION: We found no evidence for the superiority of CBT or short-term psychoanalytical therapy compared with a brief psychosocial intervention in maintenance of reduced depression symptoms 12 months after treatment. Short-term psychoanalytical therapy was as effective as CBT and, together with brief psychosocial intervention, offers additional patient choice for psychological therapy, alongside CBT, for adolescents with moderate to severe depression who are attending routine specialist CAMHS clinics. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme, and the Department of Health.

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/s2215-0366(16)30378-9

Cites

32 of 32 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?

  • The average rating on each CBT subscale was 5.42 out of 6, indicating high adherence to the CBT therapeutic model.

    “The average rating on each on the CBT subscale was 5.42 out of 6 indicating high adherence to the CBT therapeutic model.81”

    From Acceptance and commitment therapy for mild traumatic brain injury (ACTion-mTBI): a quasiexperimental feasibility study (2025) · cites this paper as [81]

    The Results (page not available) report that 74% of rated CBT sessions met treatment-fidelity criteria and that CBT sessions scored higher on the cognitive behavioural subscale than the comparison therapies. They do not report an average CBT subscale rating of 5.42 out of 6, so the specific rating is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • There is a growing body of literature showing that different psychological interventions (for both migraine and other disorders) lead to similar improvements, which is in line with the present results.

    “Beyond this, there is a growing body of literature showing that different psychological interventions (for both migraine and other disorders) lead to similar improvements, (19, 54) which is in line with the present results.”

    From Efficacy of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for the Prophylaxis of Migraine in Adults: A Three-Armed Randomized Controlled Trial (2022) · cites this paper as [54]

    The Results report similar reductions in depressive symptoms across three psychological interventions for adolescents with depression, supporting the claim’s ‘other disorders’ portion. The Discussion cautions that, without a no-treatment control group, the study cannot establish that the therapies caused those improvements. This source does not study migraine. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Short-term therapies, often 8-12 weeks in length, are as effective as longer-term treatments in terms of both immediate and longitudinal outcomes.

    “Evidence suggests that short-term therapies—often 8-12 weeks in length—are as effective as longer-term treatments in terms of both immediate and longitudinal outcomes [20].”

    From Technology enabled clinical care (TECC): Protocol for a prospective longitudinal cohort study of smartphone-augmented mental health treatment (2021) · cites this paper as [20]

    The Results report no significant difference in depressive symptoms between the three treatments at weeks 36, 52, and 86, supporting comparable outcomes in adolescents with depression. But the paper does not establish that therapies lasting 8–12 weeks generally match longer treatments: its brief intervention was planned for 12 weeks, while the Results report a mean actual treatment duration of 27.5 weeks in that group. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [26]Byford S Barrett B Roberts C Cost-effectiveness of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and routine specialist care with and without cognitive behavioural therapy in adolescents with major depression Br J Psychiatry 191 2007 521 527 18055956
  2. [27]National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013 NICE London 27905712

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Goodyer, I. M., Reynolds, S., Barrett, B., Byford, S., Dubicka, B., Hill, J., Holland, F., Kelvin, R., Midgley, N., Roberts, C., Senior, R., Target, M., Widmer, B., Wilkinson, P., & Fonagy, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • University of Reading (GB)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • Anna Freud Centre (GB)
  • The Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Goodyer, Ian M
ORCID
Venue
The Lancet Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-02
Volume
4
Issue
2
Pages
109-119
ISSN
2215-0366 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s2215-0366(16)30378-9
PMC
PMC5285447
OpenAlex
W2558778675
Cited by
259
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 3
FWCI
29.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • The Lancet Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Staff Publications Online (The Tavistock and Portman) (acceptedVersion)
  • CentAUR (University of Reading) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Apollo
Funders
National Institute for Health and Care Research (97/29/01, 06-05-01, NF-SI-0514-10157)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
Keywords
adolescent depression, unipolar major depression, cognitive behavioral therapy, brief psychosocial intervention, remission maintenance, intervention fidelity, child and adolescent mental health services, treatment costs, IMPACT trial, Mood and Feelings Questionnaire
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Major Depressive Disorder, England, Female, Humans, Male, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, State Medicine, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Linear Models, 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