Cited by 167Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsMental Health Treatment and AccessMedication Adherence and Compliance

Treatment refusal and premature termination in psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, and their combination: A meta-analysis of head-to-head comparisons.

Swift, Joshua K., Greenberg, Roger P., Tompkins, Kelley A., Parkin, Susannah R.·2017·Psychotherapy

Abstract

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to examine rates of treatment refusal and premature termination for pharmacotherapy alone, psychotherapy alone, pharmacotherapy plus psychotherapy, and psychotherapy plus pill placebo treatments. A systematic review of the literature resulted in 186 comparative trials that included a report of treatment refusal and/or premature termination for at least 2 of the 4 treatment conditions. The data from these studies were pooled using a random-effects analysis. Odds Ratio effect sizes were then calculated to compare the rates between treatment conditions, once across all studies and then again for specific client disorder categories. An average treatment refusal rate of 8.2% was found across studies. Clients who were assigned to pharmacotherapy were 1.76 times more likely to refuse treatment compared with clients who were assigned psychotherapy. Differences in refusal rates for pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy were particularly evident for depressive disorders, panic disorder, and social anxiety disorder. On average, 21.9% of clients prematurely terminated their treatment. Across studies, clients who were assigned to pharmacotherapy were 1.20 times more likely to drop out compared with clients who were assigned to psychotherapy. Pharmacotherapy clients with anorexia/bulimia and depressive disorders dropped out at higher rates compared with psychotherapy clients with these disorders. Treatment refusal and dropout are significant problems in both psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy and providers of these treatments should seek to employ strategies to reduce their occurrence. (PsycINFO Database Record

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/pst0000104

Cites

45 of 45 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Swift, J. K., Greenberg, R. P., Tompkins, K. A., & Parkin, S. R.
Affiliations
  • Idaho State University (US)
  • SUNY Upstate Medical University (US)
  • University of Alaska Anchorage (US)
Venue
Psychotherapy
Published
2017-03
Volume
54
Issue
1
Pages
47-57
ISSN
  • 0033-3204 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1536
OpenAlex
W2593514681
Cited by
167
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 3
FWCI
1.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
Keywords
treatment refusal, early termination, treatment discontinuation, pharmacotherapy, combined psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy, depressive disorders, panic disorder, social anxiety disorder, anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, medication adherence
MeSH terms
Combined Modality Therapy, Humans, Object Attachment, Patient Dropouts, Psychotherapy, Psychotropic Drugs, Psychotherapeutic Processes, Placebo Effect, Treatment Refusal

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