Cited by 209Schizophrenia research and treatmentPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsBipolar Disorder and Treatment

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Subjects at Ultrahigh Risk for Developing Psychosis: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Open access
van der Gaag, M., Nieman, D. H., Rietdijk, J., Dragt, S., Ising, H. K., Klaassen, R. M. C., Koeter, M., Cuijpers, P. +2 more·2012·Schizophrenia Bulletin

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Evidence for the effectiveness of treatments for subjects at ultrahigh risk (UHR) for developing psychosis remains inconclusive. OBJECTIVE: A new cognitive behavioral intervention specifically targeted at cognitive biases (ie, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy [CBT] for UHR patients plus treatment as usual [TAU] called CBTuhr) is compared with TAU in a group of young help-seeking UHR subjects. METHODS: A total of 201 patients were recruited at 4 sites and randomized. In most cases, CBTuhr was an add-on therapy because most people were seeking help for a comorbid disorder. The CBT was provided for 6 months, and the follow-up period was 18 months. RESULTS: In the CBTuhr condition, 10 patients transitioned to psychosis compared with 22 in the TAU condition (χ(2) (1) = 5.575, P = .03). The number needed to treat (NNT) was 9 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.7-89.9). At 18-month follow-up the CBTuhr group was significantly more often remitted from an at-risk mental state, with a NNT of 7 (95% CI: 3.7-71.2). Intention-to-treat analysis, including 5 violations against exclusion criteria, showed a statistical tendency (χ(2) (1) = 3.338, P = .06). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with TAU, this new CBT (focusing on normalization and awareness of cognitive biases) showed a favorable effect on the transition to psychosis and reduction of subclinical psychotic symptoms in subjects at UHR to develop psychosis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/schbul/sbs105

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 43 · Cited by 209

Authors
van der Gaag, M., Nieman, D. H., Rietdijk, J., Dragt, S., Ising, H. K., Klaassen, R. M. C., Koeter, M., Cuijpers, P., Wunderink, L., & Linszen, D. H.
Affiliations
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
  • Parnassia Groep (NL)
  • GGZ Rivierduinen (NL)
  • GGZ Friesland (NL)
Venue
Schizophrenia Bulletin
Published
2012-09-01
Volume
38
Issue
6
Pages
1180-1188
ISSN
  • 0586-7614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-1701
OpenAlex
W2163439420
Cited by
209
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 17
FWCI
13.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Schizophrenia Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Digital Academic REpository of VU University Amsterdam (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
Funders
ZonMw (120510001)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
Keywords
cognitive behavioral therapy
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Psychotic Disorders, Risk, Schizophrenia, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Prodromal Symptoms

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