Cited by 62Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsMental Health Treatment and AccessDigital Mental Health Interventions

Care-as-usual control groups across different settings in randomized trials on psychotherapy for adult depression: a meta-analysis

Open access
Cuijpers, Pim, Quero, Soledad, Papola, Davide, Cristea, Ioana A., Karyotaki, Eirini·2021·Psychological Medicine

Abstract

Background: Care-as-usual (CAU) is often used as a control condition in psychotherapy research, but it may vary considerably what that entails, ranging from no treatment, to routine treatment in primary care, general medical care, perinatal care, and specialized mental health care. Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis of trials comparing psychotherapy for depression to CAU, with a focus on the different categories of CAU and countries where the studies were conducted. We used an existing database of randomized trials on psychotherapy for depression that is updated every year. Results: A total of 140 studies with 15 419 patients were included. We found no significant differences in effects between categories of CAU (effect sizes ranging from g = 0.43 for CAU in primary care to g = 0.73 for no treatment), but heterogeneity was high in all CAU categories. After stratifying effects across specific countries (within CAU categories) we found that heterogeneity was considerably lower and there were several significant differences between countries. Overall, effects were larger in non-Western countries (g = 0.84 to 1.28) compared to those in Western countries (g = 0.52; p for difference = 0.002). Effects were smaller in studies with risk of bias (p = 0.01). Conclusions: There are no significant differences between major categories of CAU when compared to psychotherapy conditions in randomized trials. However, effects of psychotherapy differ considerably across CAU conditions in specific countries. CAU therefore is a heterogeneous control condition in psychotherapy research.

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 · 10.1017/s0033291719003581

Cites

34 of 34 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?

  • TAU was found to be a very heterogeneous control condition and anything but usual or standard care.

    “TAU, in addition, was also found to be a very heterogeneous control condition and anything but usual or standard care85,86.”

    From A systematic review and meta-analysis of acceptance- and mindfulness-based interventions for DSM-5 anxiety disorders (2021) · cites this paper as [85]

    The Discussion confirms that care-as-usual is a heterogeneous control condition, with categories ranging from no treatment to specialized mental health care. But the Introduction also describes it as care usually provided in a given setting; the paper does not establish that it is ‘anything but usual’ care in that sense. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    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: 1

  1. Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. K. (1996). BDI-II. Beck depression inven- tory second edition. Manual. San Antonio: Psychological Corporation.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cuijpers, P., Quero, S., Papola, D., Cristea, I. A., & Karyotaki, E.
Affiliations
  • Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
  • Universitat Jaume I (ES)
  • University of Verona (IT)
  • University of Pavia (IT)
Corresponding author
Cuijpers, Pim
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Published
2019-12-17
Volume
51
Issue
4
Pages
634-644
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
OpenAlex
W2994802459
Cited by
62
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 1
FWCI
0.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Repositori UJI (Universitat Jaume I) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
  • VU Research Portal (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Padua Research Archive (University of Padova) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
usual care, control conditions, psychotherapy for depression, adult depression, primary care, perinatal care, specialized mental health care, no treatment, country differences, risk of bias, heterogeneous effects
MeSH terms
Adult, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychotherapy, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Control Groups

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