The differential effectiveness of group psychotherapy: A meta-analytic perspective.
Abstract
All in-text\treferences\tunderlined\tin\tblue\tare\tlinked\tto\tpublications\ton\tResearchGate, letting you\taccess\tand\tread\tthem\timmediately.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Solid empirical evidence exists for group therapy for cancer and HIV patients.
“Solid empirical evidence exists for group therapy for cancer and HIV patients [24].”
The effectiveness of group therapy has been proven in several meta-analyses.
“The effectiveness of group therapy has been proven in several meta-analyses [24]”
For patients with somatic diseases, group therapy is regarded as an effective treatment; a meta-analysis found a moderate pre-to-post effect size of d = 0.49.
“For patients with somatic diseases, group therapy is also regarded as an effective treatment. In a meta-analysis of studies across different somatic diseases, a moderate pre to post effect size of d = 0.49 was found [24].”
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 39 · Cited by 321
- Authors
- Burlingame, G. M., Fuhriman, A., & Mosier, J.
- Affiliations
- Brigham Young University (US)
- ORCID
- Burlingame, Gary M.
- Venue
- Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice
- Published
- 2003-03
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-12
- ISSN
- 1089-2699 (ISSN-L)
- 1930-7802
- OpenAlex
- W2093590602
- Cited by
- 321
- References
- 39
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 77 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 19
- FWCI
- 7.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Group Dynamics Theory Research and Practice (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Counseling Practices and Supervision
- Keywords
- group therapy, differential effectiveness, treatment outcomes
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
