Cited by 169

Imipramine Plus Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy in the Treatment of School Refusal

BERNSTEIN, GAIL A., BORCHARDT, CARRIE M., PERWIEN, AMY R., CROSBY, ROSS D., KUSHNER, MATT G., THURAS, PAUL D., LAST, CYNTHIA G.·2000·Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry

Abstract

Objective To investigate the efficacy of 8 weeks of imipramine versus placebo in combination with cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for the treatment of school-refusing adolescents with comorbid anxiety and major depressive disorders. Method This was a randomized, double-blind trial with 63 subjects entering the study and 47 completing. Outcome measures were weekly school attendance rates based on percentage of hours attended and anxiety and depression rating scales. Results Over the course of treatment, school attendance improved significantly for the imipramine group (z = 4.36, p Conclusions Imipramine plus CBT is significantly more efficacious than placebo plus CBT in improving school attendance and decreasing symptoms of depression in school-refusing adolescents with comorbid anxiety and depression.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00004583-200003000-00008

Cites

5 of 5 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
BERNSTEIN, G. A., BORCHARDT, C. M., PERWIEN, A. R., CROSBY, R. D., KUSHNER, M. G., THURAS, P. D., & LAST, C. G.
Venue
Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-03
Volume
39
Issue
3
Pages
276-283
ISSN
0890-8567
Cited by
169
References
5
Language
en

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