Cited by 133Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Does the unified protocol really change neuroticism? Results from a randomized trial

Open access
Sauer-Zavala, Shannon, Fournier, Jay C., Jarvi Steele, Stephanie, Woods, Brittany K., Wang, Mengxing, Farchione, Todd J., Barlow, David H.·2021·Psychological Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Neuroticism is associated with the onset and maintenance of a number of mental health conditions, as well as a number of deleterious outcomes (e.g. physical health problems, higher divorce rates, lost productivity, and increased treatment seeking); thus, the consideration of whether this trait can be addressed in treatment is warranted. To date, outcome research has yielded mixed results regarding neuroticism's responsiveness to treatment, perhaps due to the fact that study interventions are typically designed to target disorder symptoms rather than neuroticism itself. The purpose of the current study was to explore whether a course of treatment with the unified protocol (UP), a transdiagnostic intervention that was explicitly developed to target neuroticism, results in greater reductions in neuroticism compared to gold-standard, symptom focused cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) protocols and a waitlist (WL) control condition. METHOD: Patients with principal anxiety disorders (N = 223) were included in this study. They completed a validated self-report measure of neuroticism, as well as clinician-rated measures of psychological symptoms. RESULTS: At week 16, participants in the UP condition exhibited significantly lower levels of neuroticism than participants in the symptom-focused CBT (t(218) = -2.17, p = 0.03, d = -0.32) and WL conditions(t(207) = -2.33, p = 0.02, d = -0.43), and these group differences remained after controlling for simultaneous fluctuations in depression and anxiety symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment effects on neuroticism may be most robust when this trait is explicitly targeted.

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/s0033291720000975

Cites

64 of 64 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?

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: 5

  1. Barlow DH, Sauer-Zavala S, Farchione TJ, Murray Latin H, Ellard KK, Bullis JR, … Cassiello-Robbins C (2018b). Unified protocol for the transdiagnostic treatment of emotional disorders: Patient workbook (2nd edn). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  2. Brown TA, & Barlow DH (2014). Anxiety and related disorders interview schedule for DSM-5 (ADIS-5L): Lifetime version. Client interview schedule. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  3. Foa EB, Yadin E, & Lichner TK (2012). Treating your OCD with exposure and response (ritual) prevention workbook. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  4. Hope DA, Heimberg RG, & Turk CL (2010). Managing social anxiety: A cognitive-behavioral therapy approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  5. Tang TZ, DeRubeis RJ, Hollon SD, Amsterdam J, Shelton R, & Schalet B (2009). A placebo-controlled test of the effects of paroxetine and cognitive therapy on personality risk factors in depression. Archives of General Psychiatry, 66, 1322– 1330. 19996037 PMC2799251

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sauer-Zavala, S., Fournier, J. C., Jarvi Steele, S., Woods, B. K., Wang, M., Farchione, T. J., & Barlow, D. H.
Affiliations
  • University of Kentucky (US)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • Boston University (US)
Corresponding author
Sauer-Zavala, Shannon
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Published
2020-04-21
Volume
51
Issue
14
Pages
2378-2387
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
OpenAlex
W3016695856
Cited by
133
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 4
FWCI
18.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Smith ScholarWorks (Smith College) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH090053)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
neuroticism, Unified Protocol, transdiagnostic treatment, anxiety disorders, cognitive behavioral therapy, trait change, treatment response, waitlist control, depression, anxiety symptoms
MeSH terms
Neuroticism, Adult, Anxiety Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, Phenotype, Waiting Lists, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, 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