Cited by 11Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPsychological Treatments and Assessments

An exploration of group cognitive analytic therapy for anxiety and depression

Martin, Elaine, Byrne, Gary, Connon, Graham, Power, Liz·2021·Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice

Abstract

Objectives Cognitive analytic therapy has been shown to be an effective psychological treatment for a range of differing presentations but little research to date has focused on the use of Group CAT (GCAT). The aim of this study was to explore the acceptability, feasibility, and preliminary effectiveness of GCAT for clients with mood and anxiety disorders in primary care. Design This study utilized a mixed method design. Method A 12-session GCAT programme was developed covering key CAT concepts. The structure reflected the three phases of CAT - reformulation, recognition, and revision. Participants completed outcome measures pre- and post-treatment and at 3-month follow-up. Acceptability was reported using session attendance and participant feedback in addition to asking clients to rank the utility of CAT treatment components. A therapist interview was also completed. Results Fifty-five per cent of clients completed the treatment, and feedback suggests that GCAT is an acceptable and feasible intervention for a primary care population. Clients also reported on the utility of specific CAT treatment components. Clients demonstrated positive change on a number of outcome measures. Conclusions Group cognitive analytic therapy shows promise as an acceptable and feasible treatment for clients with mood and anxiety disorders presenting to primary care services. Further larger and more controlled studies are indicated. Practitioner points The study supports the idea that GCAT is an ac…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/papt.12299

Cites

51 of 51 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

3 of the 54 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Martin, E., Byrne, G., Connon, G., & Power, L.
Affiliations
Health Service Executive (IE)
Corresponding author
Martin, Elaine
Venue
Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-09-26
Volume
94
Issue
S1
Pages
79-95
ISSN
  • 1476-0835 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-8341
OpenAlex
W3088532426
Cited by
11
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1
FWCI
1.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychology and Psychotherapy Theory Research and Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
Keywords
cognitive analytic therapy, anxiety disorders, depression, mood disorders, primary care, treatment acceptability, treatment feasibility, treatment effectiveness, reformulation, recognition, revision
MeSH terms
Anxiety, Anxiety Disorders, Cognition, Depression, Humans, Psychotherapy

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