Cited by 7Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology

Attending to the Alliance in the Application of the Unified Protocol for the Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders: A Case Study

Donahue, Joseph M., Hormes, Julia M., Gordis, Elana B., Anderson, Drew A.·2019·Clinical Case Studies

Abstract

As conceptualizations of mood and anxiety disorders shift toward a dimensional approach, transdiagnostic treatments have gained recognition and support. The Unified Protocol for the Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders (UP) is an evidence-based cognitive behavioral therapy that targets the core processes that underlie common and comorbid mental disorders. It is designed to help clients learn how to confront, experience, and respond to their emotions in adaptive ways through the modification of their emotion regulation strategies. The current case study describes the flexible application of the UP with a treatment-naïve 25-year-old female who presented to outpatient therapy with symptoms of anxiety and depression. Additions to the UP were made to address issues related to the therapeutic alliance and information discovered over the course of treatment. Outcome measures administered to the client reflect significant symptom improvement and add to a growing body of literature that supports the usefulness of transdiagnostic approaches to treating a range of disorders. Moreover, quantitative and qualitative data point to the necessity for clinicians to attend to the therapeutic alliance and consider cultural factors when delivering manualized treatment approaches to individuals from diverse backgrounds.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1534650119845503

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Therapists must be able to address personal and contextual factors when following manualized protocols.

    “As stated in previous research, therapists must be able to address personal and contextual factors when following manualized protocols (Donahue et al., 2019)”
  • Treatment rapport was maintained throughout the treatment after delivery via internet and during follow-up.

    “treatment rapport and adherence, a key aspect of psychological interventions (Donahue et al., 2019), were qualitatively assessed with Patricia (e.g., How do you feel talking about these personal things of your life with me?) and they were maintained throughout the treatment after delivery via internet and during the follow-up.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Donahue, J. M., Hormes, J. M., Gordis, E. B., & Anderson, D. A.
Affiliations
University at Albany, State University of New York (US)
Corresponding author
Donahue, Joseph M.
Venue
Clinical Case Studies
Published
2019-04-23
Volume
18
Issue
4
Pages
282-299
ISSN
  • 1534-6501 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3802
OpenAlex
W2941834839
Cited by
7
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3
FWCI
1.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Clinical Case Studies (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
Keywords
transdiagnostic treatment, therapeutic relationship, emotion regulation, cognitive behavioral therapy, anxiety, depression, cultural factors in treatment

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