Cited by 83Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsBipolar Disorder and Treatment

Dropout rates from psychotherapy trials for borderline personality disorder: A meta-analysis.

Iliakis, Evan Alexander, Ilagan, Gabrielle Silva, Choi-Kain, Lois Wonsun·2021·Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment

Abstract

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a serious mental illness associated with heightened disability, risk for suicide, and costs to society. This study aims to meta-analytically quantify dropout rates from psychotherapies of BPD, identify moderators, and assess reasons for dropout and time taken to dropout. PubMed, PsycINFO, and MEDLINE were screened from database inception to March 2020 for trials that investigated psychotherapies for individuals with BPD reporting dropout rates. The primary outcomes were pooled dropout rates and differential treatment retention across all studies, all randomized controlled trials (RCT), all outpatient studies, and all outpatient RCTs. Random effects meta-analysis, metaregression analyses, and publication bias tests were conducted. Information on reasons for dropout and time to dropout was synthesized qualitatively. Dropout rates were 22.3% considering all studies, and 28.2% when only considering outpatient randomized controlled trials. Odds of dropout were not significantly higher in the control condition than in the intervention condition. Longer duration, randomization, phone coaching, and outpatient setting were associated with higher dropout rates, but only when considering all studies. Publication bias-adjusted dropout rates were as high as 29.9%. Reasons for dropout included dissatisfaction with treatment, expulsion from treatment, and lack of motivation. Most dropouts occurred in the first half of treatment. Dropout is an important and prevalent issue in BPD psychotherapies. Reported rates are minimized by publication bias, and moderators of dropout rates are inconsistent. Subsequent research should identify obstacles to completing treatment and investigate ways to organize treatment allocation to enhance treatment retention. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/per0000453

Cites

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Iliakis, E. A., Ilagan, G. S., & Choi-Kain, L. W.
Affiliations
McLean Hospital (US)
Venue
Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment
Published
2021-05
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
193-206
ISSN
  • 1949-2715 (ISSN-L)
  • 1949-2723
OpenAlex
W3129983697
Cited by
83
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 1
FWCI
6.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Personality Disorders Theory Research and Treatment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
Keywords
borderline personality disorder, psychotherapy dropout, treatment retention, outpatient psychotherapy, randomized controlled trials, publication bias, causes of dropout, treatment duration, phone coaching
MeSH terms
Borderline Personality Disorder, Humans, Motivation, Psychotherapy, Suicide

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