Cited by 299Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsBipolar Disorder and Treatment

Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review Assessing the Efficacy of Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT)

Open access
Panos, Patrick T., Jackson, John W., Hasan, Omar, Panos, Angelea·2014·Research on Social Work Practice

Abstract

Objective: The objective was to quantitatively and qualitatively examine the efficacy of DBT (e.g., decreasing life-threatening suicidal and parasuicidal acts, attrition, and depression) explicitly with borderline personality disorder (BPD) and using conservative assumptions and criteria, across treatment providers and settings. Method: Five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified in a systematic search that examined the efficacy of DBT in reducing suicide attempts, parasuicidal behavior, attrition during treatment, or symptoms of depression, in adult patients with BPD. Results: Combining effect measures for suicide and parasuicidal behavior (five studies total) revealed a net benefit in favor of DBT (pooled Hedges’ g −0.622). DBT was only marginally better than treatment as usual (TAU) in reducing attrition during treatment in five RCTs (pooled risk difference −0.168). DBT was not significantly different from TAU in reducing depression symptoms in three RCTs (pooled Hedges’ g −0.896). Discussion: DBT demonstrates efficacy in stabilizing and controlling self-destructive behavior and improving patient compliance.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1049731513503047

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • DBT was excluded from the current review because it has been mainly tested in RCTs for the treatment of borderline personality disorder.

    “DBT was excluded from the current review as this approach has been mainly tested in RCTs for the treatment of borderline personality disorder (Panos et al. , 2014).”

    From A meta-analysis of third wave mindfulness-based cognitive behavioral therapies for older people (2017) · cites this paper as Panos et al. , 2014

    The Method (Study Selection) limits this review to DBT RCTs involving adults with borderline personality disorder, and the Results (Description of Included Studies) report five such trials. Because the search was restricted to BPD, the paper does not establish that DBT RCTs have mainly tested that condition rather than others. It also does not address the citing authors’ decision to exclude DBT from their review. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) has been proved effective to treat ED in disorders other than autism spectrum disorder.

    “Dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) has been proved effective to treat ED in disorders other than autism spectrum disorder.”

    From Feasibility, Acceptability and Preliminary Efficacy of Dialectical Behavior Therapy for Autistic Adults without Intellectual Disability: A Mixed Methods Study (2022) · cites this paper as Panos et al., 2014

    The Introduction and Discussion report that DBT targets emotional regulation and is effective for some outcomes in adults with borderline personality disorder, a disorder other than autism spectrum disorder. But the Introduction says the review dropped its behavioral-skills outcome because it was not consistently measured, and the Discussion says there is insufficient evidence that DBT successfully teaches those skills. It therefore does not establish that DBT is effective specifically for emotional dysregulation (ED). (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Overall, the significant improvement in self-reported ED is consistent with our clinical observations and with findings relative to DBT in several disorders.

    “Overall, the significant improvement in self-reported ED is consistent with our clinical observations and with findings relative to DBT in several disorders (Panos et al., 2014; DeCou et al., 2019).”

    From Feasibility, Acceptability and Preliminary Efficacy of Dialectical Behavior Therapy for Autistic Adults without Intellectual Disability: A Mixed Methods Study (2022) · cites this paper as Panos et al., 2014

    The Results and Discussion report that DBT reduced suicidal and self-harming behavior in patients with borderline personality disorder. The Introduction identifies emotional regulation as a DBT target, but the paper does not establish improvement in self-reported emotional dysregulation; the Discussion says evidence is insufficient to conclude that DBT teaches skills needed for long-term improvement. This paper therefore supports a DBT finding in one disorder, not the broader implication that it found improvement in emotional dysregulation across several disorders (page numbers unavailable in our copy). (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • DBT is highly effective in treating self-harm among those with borderline personality disorder.

    “DBT is highly effective in treating presentations of self-harm among those with borderline personality disorder and is frequently delivered as group therapy [10].”
  • The absence of an intervention effect for secondary outcomes appears to corroborate findings from prior meta-analytic studies that even face-to-face DBT does not significantly reduce depressive symptoms among adolescents (p=0.099) nor adults (p=0.08).

    “The absence of an intervention effect for secondary mental health and well-being outcomes was unexpected yet appears to corroborate findings from prior meta-analytic studies that even face-to-face DBT does not significantly reduce depressive symptoms among adolescents (p = 0.099; [32]) nor adults (p = 0.08; [33]).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 39 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Linehan MM 1993a Cognitive behavioral therapy of borderline personality disorder New York, NY Guilford Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Panos, P. T., Jackson, J. W., Hasan, O., & Panos, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Utah (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Panos, Patrick T.
Venue
Research on Social Work Practice
Published
2013-09-19
Volume
24
Issue
2
Pages
213-223
ISSN
  • 1049-7315 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-7581
OpenAlex
W2043982193
Cited by
299
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 6
FWCI
1.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Research on Social Work Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (T32MH017119)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
Keywords
dialectical behavior therapy, borderline personality disorder, suicide attempts, parasuicide, treatment discontinuation, depressive symptoms, treatment efficacy, self-destructive behavior

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