CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 387Schizophrenia research and treatmentPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsMental Health and Psychiatry

Cognitive-behavioral therapy for schizophrenia: An empirical review

RECTOR, NEIL A., BECK, AARON T.·2001·The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease
DOI 10.1097/00005053-200105000-00002
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Early case studies and noncontrolled trial studies focusing on the treatment of delusions and hallucinations have laid the foundation for more recent developments in comprehensive cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) interventions for schizophrenia. Seven randomized, controlled trial studies testing the efficacy of CBT for schizophrenia were identified by electronic search (MEDLINE and PsychInfo) and by personal correspondence. After a review of these studies, effect size (ES) estimates were computed to determine the statistical magnitude of clinical change in CBT and control treatment conditions. CBT has been shown to produce large clinical effects on measures of positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia. Patients receiving routine care and adjunctive CBT have experienced additional benefits above and beyond the gains achieved with routine care and adjunctive supportive therapy. These results reveal promise for the role of CBT in the treatment of schizophrenia although additional research is required to test its efficacy, long-term durability, and impact on relapse rates and quality of life. Clinical refinements are needed also to help those who show only minimal benefit with the intervention.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00005053-200105000-00002

Cites

53 of 53 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?

  • Alternative psychosocial interventions, such as supportive therapy or befriending, produced intermediate results (grand mean ES=0.60).

    “Alternative psychosocial interventions, such as supportive therapy or befriending, produced intermediate results (grand mean ES=0.60).”

    From The empirical status of cognitive-behavioral therapy: A review of meta-analyses (2006) · cites this paper as Rector and Beck (2001)

  • Rector and Beck (2001) concluded that CBT plus routine care led to substantial pretreatment-posttreatment improvements in positive symptoms, negative symptoms, and total symptoms for schizophrenia (grand mean ES=1.23).

    “They concluded that CBT plus routine care (pharmacotherapy and case management) led to substantial pretreatmentposttreatment improvements in positive symptoms, negative symptoms, and total symptoms (grand mean ES=1.23).”

    From The empirical status of cognitive-behavioral therapy: A review of meta-analyses (2006) · cites this paper as Rector and Beck (2001)

  • Patients receiving only routine care did much less well (grand mean ES=0.17).

    “Patients receiving only routine care did much less well (grand mean ES=0.17).”

    From The empirical status of cognitive-behavioral therapy: A review of meta-analyses (2006) · cites this paper as Rector and Beck (2001)

  • In the CBT condition, the effect size for change in negative symptoms, despite decreasing, remained large (ES=0.88) at follow-up.

    “In contrast, the effect size for the CBT condition, despite decreasing, remained large (ES=0.88) at follow-up.”

    From The empirical status of cognitive-behavioral therapy: A review of meta-analyses (2006) · cites this paper as Rector and Beck (2001)

  • Across three studies, large effect sizes were found for change in the magnitude of negative symptoms at 9-month follow-up (ES=0.88).

    “Similarly, large effect sizes were found for change in the magnitude of negative symptoms at 9-month follow-up across three studies (ES=0.88).”

    From The empirical status of cognitive-behavioral therapy: A review of meta-analyses (2006) · cites this paper as Rector and Beck (2001)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
RECTOR, N. A., & BECK, A. T.
Affiliations
  • Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CA)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
ORCID
Venue
The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2001-05
Volume
189
Issue
5
Pages
278-287
ISSN
0022-3018 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/00005053-200105000-00002
OpenAlex
W1978345775
Cited by
387
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 27
FWCI
3.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
Keywords
cognitive behavioral therapy, schizophrenia, delusions, hallucinations, positive symptoms, negative symptoms, adjunctive therapy, supportive therapy, treatment efficacy, effect size, relapse
MeSH terms
Adult, Combined Modality Therapy, Delusions, Female, Hallucinations, Humans, Male, Psychotherapy, Schizophrenia, Schizophrenic Psychology, Antipsychotic Agents, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome

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