Cited by 24Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Frequency and level of self-efficacy predict the effectiveness of therapist- and self-guided exposure in obsessive compulsive disorder

Voderholzer, Ulrich, Hilbert, Sven, Fischer, Anne, Neumüller, Jakob, Schwartz, Caroline, Hessler-Kaufmann, Johannes Baltasar·2020·Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy

Abstract

Background: While exposure and response prevention (ERP) is the most effective treatment for obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), less is known about the specific mechanisms underlying symptom change after ERP. Aims: We tested the hypothesis that the frequency of self- and therapist-guided ERP related to the extent of symptom reduction and that this link is mediated by increased self-efficacy. Method: In a sample of 377 in-patients with a primary diagnosis of OCD receiving in-patient CBT, we assessed symptoms (YBOCS-SR) and self-efficacy (General Self-Efficacy Scale), before and after treatment, as well as the frequency of therapist- and self-guided ERP sessions. Results: Patients with more therapist-guided ERP sessions during treatment showed more symptom reduction and the association of self-guided ERP on outcome was mediated by enhanced self-efficacy. Conclusions: These findings highlight the importance of both therapist- and self-guided ERP sessions and suggest that therapists should conduct a sufficient number of ERP sessions to optimise treatment.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1352465820000582

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Schwarzer, 1995, Measures in Health Psychology: A User’s Portfolio. Causal and Control Beliefs, 35

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Voderholzer, U., Hilbert, S., Fischer, A., Neumüller, J., Schwartz, C., & Hessler-Kaufmann, J. B.
Affiliations
  • University of Freiburg (DE)
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
  • Schön Klinik Roseneck (DE)
Corresponding author
Hessler-Kaufmann, Johannes Baltasar
Venue
Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy
Published
2020-08-20
Volume
48
Issue
6
Pages
751-755
ISSN
  • 1352-4658 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-1833
OpenAlex
W3081278895
Cited by
23
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1
FWCI
1.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
obsessive-compulsive disorder, exposure and response prevention, self-efficacy, treatment frequency, symptom relief, mediation, treatment outcomes
MeSH terms
Allied Health Personnel, Humans, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Self Efficacy

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