CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 269Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPsychological Treatments and Assessments

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 58 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

How does cognitive therapy prevent relapse in residual depression? Evidence from a controlled trial.

Open access
Teasdale, John D., Scott, Jan, Moore, Richard G., Hayhurst, Hazel, Pope, Marie, Paykel, Eugene S.·2001·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
DOI 10.1037/0022-006x.69.3.347
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study examined the cognitive mediation of relapse prevention by cognitive therapy (CT) in a trial of 158 patients with residual depression. Scores based on agreement with item content of 5 questionnaires of depression-related cognition provided no evidence for cognitive mediation. A measure of the form of response to those questionnaires, the number of times patients used extreme response categories ("totally agree" and "totally disagree"), showed significant and substantial prediction of relapse, differential response to CT. and conformity to mediational criteria. CT reduced relapse through reductions in absolutist, dichotomous thinking style. CT may prevent relapse by training patients to change the way that they process depression-related material rather than by changing belief in depressive thought content.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-006x.69.3.347

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. 10.1037/0021-843X.87.1.49 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Rabkin, 1987, The clinical measurement of depressive disorders., 30
  3. Young, 1990, Manual of the Cognitive Therapy Rating Scale.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 269

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Teasdale, J. D., Scott, J., Moore, R. G., Hayhurst, H., Pope, M., & Paykel, E. S.
Affiliations
MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2001
Volume
69
Issue
3
Pages
347-357
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
DOI
10.1037/0022-006x.69.3.347
OpenAlex
W2096931324
Cited by
269
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 6
FWCI
12.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
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
cognitive therapy, relapse prevention, residual depression, cognitive mediation, response styles, dichotomous thinking, treatment response
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Antidepressive Agents, Chronic Disease, Combined Modality Therapy, Major Depressive Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Major, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Recurrence, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome

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