Cited by 201Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology

Compassion focused therapy: a systematic review of its effectiveness and acceptability in clinical populations

Open access
Craig, Catriona, Hiskey, Syd, Spector, Aimee·2020·Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics

Abstract

Introduction: Compassion focused therapy (CFT) is an increasingly popular therapeutic modality. Its holistic and integrative approach to universal human suffering means that it is well placed as a transdiagnostic therapy. Research into its effectiveness and acceptability has increased over the previous 10 years as the therapy has evolved, and to help consider its status as an evidence-based therapy research concerning its treatment outcomes needs evaluating.Areas covered: This paper reviews research investigating the effectiveness of CFT in clinical populations.Expert opinion: CFT shows promise for a range of mental health problems, especially when delivered in a group format over at least 12 hours. This is important for funding bodies and commissioning groups to consider as they allocate healthcare resources in light of current evidence-based practice. CFT is demonstrably well accepted by clients and clinicians and there is now a clear need for an updated, universally deployed, standard manual to direct future research. This will be critical in enabling widespread implementation and further adoption into mainstream clinical practice, will address the lack of standardization in the current research, and pave the way for further randomized control trials aimed at reducing existing methodological limitations.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14737175.2020.1746184

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 systematic review found that the efficacy of CFT was associated with the number of treatment sessions, with minimally 12 sessions required to achieve positive change across various populations.

    “A systematic review published after initiation of the present study found that the efficacy of CFT was asso ciated with the number of treatment sessions, namely that minimally 12 sessions seemed to be required to achieve positive change across various populations (Craig et al., 2020).”

    From Group-based compassion-focused therapy for prolonged grief symptoms in adults – Results from a randomized controlled trial (2022) · cites this paper as Craig et al., 2020

    The Abstract says at least 12 sessions are required to significantly reduce clinical symptoms across populations. But §3.4 reports positive effects from interventions lasting less than nine hours, and §4.6 says brief CFT may reduce symptoms. The review supports the 12-session threshold for significant change, not for any positive change. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • CFT appears efficacious in treating a range of clinical populations, although existing studies vary considerably in study quality and intervention content and format.

    “This growing body of literature has been synthesized in several systematic reviews, which generally conclude that CFT appears efficacious in treating a range of clinical populations, although the existing studies vary considerably in terms of study quality and content of the therapeutic intervention and -format (Beaumont and Martin, 2015; Craig et al., 2020; Leaviss and Uttley, 2015).”
  • Craig et al. (2020) found more empirical support for group-based CFT compared to individually delivered CFT.

    “Craig et al. (2020) also found more empirical support for group-based CFT compared to individually delivered CFT.”
  • This service evaluation utilised a mixed methods approach which provided rich and useful insight into clients' experiences of the CMT group intervention, strengthening the overall evaluation.

    “Despite the limitations, this service evaluation utilised a mixed methods approach which provided rich and useful insight into clients' experiences of the CMT group intervention, strengthening the overall evaluation (Craig et al. 2020; NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement 2005).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Bell DC. Evolution of care giving behavior. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2001;5: 216-29

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Craig, C., Hiskey, S., & Spector, A.
Affiliations
  • Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • Oaks Hospital (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Craig, Catriona
Venue
Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics
Published
2020-04-02
Volume
20
Issue
4
Pages
385-400
ISSN
  • 1473-7175 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-8360
OpenAlex
W3011072785
Cited by
201
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 3
FWCI
1.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
Keywords
compassion-focused therapy, treatment effectiveness, acceptability, transdiagnostic treatment, group therapy, mental illness, evidence-based practice, healthcare resource allocation
MeSH terms
Empathy, Humans, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Psychotherapy, Outcome Assessment, Health Care

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