Cited by 64Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesBipolar Disorder and Treatment

The Effectiveness of Dialectical Behavior Therapy Skills Training Group vs. Cognitive Therapy Group on Reducing Depression and Suicide Attempts for Borderline Personality Disorder in Taiwan

Lin, Tsung-Jen, Ko, Huei-Chen, Wu, Jo Yung-Wei, Oei, Tian Po, Lane, Hsien-Yuan, Chen, Chung-Hey·2019·Archives of Suicide Research

Abstract

In this study the effectiveness of the condensed Dialectical Behavior Therapy Skills Training Group (DBTSTG) was compared to the Cognitive Therapy Group (CTG) in reducing depression and suicide reattempt and modifying emotion regulation strategies among those with borderline personality disorder (BPD). A total of 82 depressed BPD college students with a suicidal history within the past 6-months were randomly allocated to DBTSTG or CTG. Both groups had similar reductions in suicide reattempts and depression after the intervention and 6-month follow-ups. However, the CTG showed improvements in cognitive errors, but the DBTSTG revealed increases in acceptance and decreases in suppression scores. Both groups were effective in decreasing depression and suicide reattempt in BPD college students, probably through increasing adaptive antecedent-focused or response-focused strategies of emotion regulation, respectively.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13811118.2018.1436104

Cites

20 of 20 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
Lin, T.-J., Ko, H.-C., Wu, J. Y.-W., Oei, T. P., Lane, H.-Y., & Chen, C.-H.
Affiliations
Asia University (TW)
Corresponding author
Ko, Huei-Chen
Venue
Archives of Suicide Research
Published
2018-05-10
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
82-99
ISSN
  • 1381-1118 (ISSN-L)
  • 1543-6136
OpenAlex
W2790199450
Cited by
64
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 2
FWCI
6.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Archives of Suicide Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Council, Taiwan, R.O.C. ((NSC96-2413-H006-007, NSC97-2410-H006-076))
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
Keywords
dialectical behavior therapy, cognitive therapy, borderline personality disorder, depression, suicide attempts, repeated suicide attempts, emotion regulation strategies, acceptance, emotional suppression, university students, Taiwan
MeSH terms
Dialectical Behavior Therapy, Emotional Regulation, Adolescent, Adult, Borderline Personality Disorder, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Psychotherapy, Group, Suicide, Attempted, Taiwan, Self-Injurious Behavior, Treatment Outcome, Suicidal Ideation

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