Cited by 295Gastrointestinal motility and disordersAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments

Psychological treatments for irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Lackner, Jeffrey M., Mesmer, Christina, Morley, Stephen, Dowzer, Clare, Hamilton, Simon·2004·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

Abstract

This study conducted a systematic review to assess the quality of existing literature on psychological treatments for irritable bowel syndrome and to quantify the evidence for their efficacy. Three independent reviewers (2 from England, 1 from the United States) coded the quality of 32 studies, 17 of which provided data suitable for meta-analysis. Meta-analysis of efficacy data (50% reduction of symptoms) gave an odds ratio of 12 (95% confidence interval = 5.56-25.96) and a number needed to treat of 2. Psychological treatments are, as a class of interventions, effective in reducing symptoms compared with a pooled group of control conditions. Questions regarding the relative superiority of specific psychological treatments and influence of active versus nonspecific treatment effects remain unanswered.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-006x.72.6.1100

Cites

100 of 100 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • The average post-treatment effect on GI symptoms in this analysis (d=0.69) was similar to that previously reported for bowel dysfunction (d=0.57) and considerably higher than that previously reported for abdominal pain (d=0.27).

    “The average effect on GI symptoms after treatment (d ¼ 0.69) in our analysis was similar to that reported previously for bowel dysfunction (d ¼ 0.57) and considerably higher than that reported previously for abdominal pain (d ¼ 0.27) in the only previously published meta-analysis on this topic using continuous outcomes.7”
  • Psychological therapies are as effective as antidepressants in reducing GI symptoms in IBS immediately after treatment, with a number needed to treat between 2 and 4.

    “Meta-analyses suggest that psychological therapies are as effective as antidepressants in reducing GI symptoms in IBS immediately after treatment, with a number needed to treat between 2 and 4. [5][6][7]”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lackner, J. M., Mesmer, C., Morley, S., Dowzer, C., & Hamilton, S.
Affiliations
  • Erie County Medical Center (US)
  • University at Buffalo, State University of New York (US)
  • University of Leeds (GB)
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Published
2004
Volume
72
Issue
6
Pages
1100-1113
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
OpenAlex
W2043126698
Cited by
295
References
97
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 19
FWCI
3.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01DK054211, DK-54211)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal motility and disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Keywords
irritable bowel syndrome, psychological intervention, symptom relief, treatment efficacy, psychotherapy, number needed to treat
MeSH terms
Humans, Psychotherapy, Irritable Bowel Syndrome

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