Cited by 384Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Dialectical Behavior Therapy for Depressed Older Adults: A Randomized Pilot Study

Lynch, Thomas R., Morse, Jennifer Q., Mendelson, Tamar, Robins, Clive J.·2003·The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry

Abstract

Objective Although there is evidence for the efficacy of antidepressants and for some individual and group psychotherapy interventions for depressed older adults, a significant number of these do not respond to treatment. Authors assessed the benefits of augmenting medication with group psychotherapy.Methods They randomly assigned 34 (largely chronically) depressed individuals age 60 and older to receive 28 weeks of antidepressant medication plus clinical management, either alone (MED) or with the addition of dialectical behavior therapy skills-training and scheduled telephone coaching sessions (MED+DBT).Results Only MED+DBT showed significant decreases on mean self-rated depression scores, and both treatment groups demonstrated significant and roughly equivalent decreases on interviewer-rated depression scores. However, on interviewer-rated depression, 71% of MED+DBT patients were in remission at post-treatment, in contrast to 47% of MED patients. At a 6-month follow-up, 75% of MED+DBT patients were in remission, compared with only 31% of MED patients, a significant difference. Only patients receiving MED+DBT showed significant improvements from pre- to post-treatment on dependency and adaptive coping that are proposed to create vulnerability to depression.Conclusion Results from this pilot study suggest that DBT skills training and telephone coaching may offer promise to effectively augment the effects of antidepressant medication in depressed older adults.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00019442-200301000-00006

Cites

73 of 73 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
Lynch, T. R., Morse, J. Q., Mendelson, T., & Robins, C. J.
Affiliations
Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
Lynch, Thomas R.
Venue
The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-01
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
33-45
ISSN
1064-7481 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2032583580
Cited by
384
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 17
FWCI
14.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01 MH-54846, P30 MH401159-14, R01MH054846, R03MH057799)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
dialectical behavior therapy, geriatric depression, antidepressant augmentation, group therapy, telephone coaching, DBT skills training, chronic depression, treatment-resistant depression, remission, dependency, adaptive coping
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Affect, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Behavior Therapy, Chronic Disease, Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Psychotherapy, Group

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