Effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy in reducing anxiety in adults and children with asthma: A systematic review
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: Asthma and anxiety are known to interact, leading to exacerbations for both conditions. This systematic review summarised evidence regarding the effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) in reducing anxiety in individuals with asthma, with results presented separately for adults and children. DATA SOURCES: PRISMA and CRD guidance were followed to conduct and report the current review. Three major electronic databases (Ovid Medline, PsycINFO, and EMBASE) and manual searches were used to find relevant published and unpublished research. STUDY SELECTIONS: Sixteen trials (12 adult- and four child-focused) met inclusion criteria, and were evaluated with adapted quality criteria. Both controlled trials and repeated-measures designs were eligible. All CBT intervention formats were eligible (group, individual, computerised, and self-help). Nine studies (eight adult and one child) focused upon participants with either an anxiety diagnosis or with above-threshold anxiety scores on a validated measure at baseline. RESULTS: The review provides tentative preliminary support for the use of CBT for anxiety in adults with asthma, with the evidence base for interventions with children appearing promising, but under-developed. Studies were more likely to indicate beneficial effects where anxiety-focused (rather than illness-focused) intervention protocols were utilised, asthma-related education was provided and where the trials focused on individuals with likely clinical levels of anxiety at baseline. CONCLUSION: Whilst further high-quality research is needed, available evidence is supportive of anxiety-focused CBT interventions tailored to target the particular mechanisms thought to maintain this comorbidity in asthma.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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 limited number of trials and methodological limitations (e.g., high variability in interventions and delivery, underpowered samples and large drop-out rates) impede conclusions on treatment efficacy.
“However, the limited number of trials and methodological limitations (e.g., high variability in interventions and delivery, underpowered samples and large drop-out rates) impedes conclusions on treatment efficacy (Kew et al., 2016;Pateraki & Morris, 2018).”
From Exposure‐based cognitive behavior therapy for anxiety related to asthma: A feasibility study with multivariate baseline design. (2020) · cites this paper as Pateraki & Morris, 2018
The indexed abstract (no page label) reports 16 trials, allows varied CBT formats, and describes the evidence for benefit as tentative or under-developed. This supports caution about treatment efficacy, but the available passage does not substantiate underpowered samples or large drop-out rates as reasons for that caution. (LLM, conf=0.80)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 50 · Cited by 37
- Authors
- Pateraki, E., & Morris, P. G.
- Affiliations
- NHS Lanarkshire (GB)
- University of Edinburgh (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Pateraki, Eleni
- Venue
- Journal of Asthma
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2017-09-29
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 532-554
- ISSN
- 0277-0903 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-4303
- OpenAlex
- W2740502902
- Cited by
- 37
- References
- 50
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 0.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- other-oa
- Locations
- Journal of Asthma (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- NHS Education Scotland
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Asthma and respiratory diseases
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
- Keywords
- cognitive behavioral therapy, asthma, anxiety, children, adults, asthma exacerbations, asthma education, self-help intervention, group therapy
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Anxiety, Asthma, Child, Humans, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy
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