Cited by 211Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychological Treatments and Assessments

Effectiveness of and dropout from outpatient cognitive behavioral therapy for adult unipolar depression: A meta-analysis of nonrandomized effectiveness studies.

Hans, Eva, Hiller, Wolfgang·2013·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

Abstract

Objective The primary aim of this study was to assess the overall effectiveness of and dropout from individual and group outpatient cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for adults with a primary diagnosis of unipolar depressive disorder in routine clinical practice. Method We conducted a random effects meta-analysis of 34 nonrandomized effectiveness studies on outpatient individual and group CBT for adult unipolar depressive disorder. Standardized mean gain effect sizes are reported for end-of-treatment and 6-month follow-up effects for depression severity, dysfunctional cognitions, general anxiety, psychological distress, and functional impairment. The mean dropout rate from CBT is reported. We benchmarked our results against high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Results Outpatient CBT was effective in reducing depressive severity in completer (d = 1.13) and intention-to-treat (ITT) samples (d = 1.06). Moderate to large posttreatment effect sizes (d = 0.67-0.88) were found for secondary outcomes. The weighted mean dropout rate was 24.63%. Posttreatment gains for depression were maintained at 6 months after completion of therapy. Effect sizes for depression were inferior to those of benchmark RCTs. Conclusions Although clinical practice patients show lesser improvements in depressive symptoms than RCT patients, individual and group outpatient CBT can be effectively transported to routine clinical practice. The considerable treatment dropout rate, especially in indiv…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0031080

Cites

34 of 34 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?

  • A recent meta-analysis found large depression effect sizes (1.06-1.13) and moderate-to-large secondary outcome effect sizes (0.7-0.9).

    “Similar findings were reported in a recent meta-analysis (Hans & Hiller, 2013), which found large effect sizes for depression (1.06–1.13), and moderate-to-large effect sizes for secondary outcomes (0.7–0.9).”
  • Depression effect sizes were lower than some efficacy studies but within the range of 0.87-2.60 reported in CBT for depression studies.

    “A similar pattern was found for depression outcomes, with effect sizes being lower than some efficacy studies (e.g., 2.0 in Elkin et al., 1989), but still within the range (0.87–2.60 across CBT for depression studies; see Hans & Hiller, 2013).”
  • Other effectiveness studies have found higher attrition than efficacy studies, averaging 25%-30% and reaching 68%.

    “Other effectiveness studies also have found higher attrition rates relative to efficacy studies, with rates averaging 25% to 30% and reaching as high as 68% (Hans & Hiller 2013; Lincoln et al., 2005).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hans, E., & Hiller, W.
Affiliations
Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE)
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Published
2013-02
Volume
81
Issue
1
Pages
75-88
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
OpenAlex
W2136406064
Cited by
211
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 50 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 5
FWCI
2.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
Keywords
cognitive behavioral therapy, major depressive disorder, outpatient psychotherapy, treatment discontinuation, individual psychotherapy, group therapy, depression severity, general anxiety, psychological distress, functional disability, dysfunctional cognitions, routine clinical practice
MeSH terms
Adult, Depressive Disorder, Humans, Outpatients, Patient Dropouts, 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