Cited by 38Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Refractory depression—Mechanisms and efficacy of radically open dialectical behaviour therapy (RefraMED): Findings of a randomised trial on benefits and harms.

Open access
Lynch, Thomas R., Hempel, Roelie J., Whalley, Ben, Byford, Sarah, Chamba, Rampaul, Clarke, Paul, Clarke, Susan, Kingdon, David G. +8 more·2020·The British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Individuals with depression often do not respond to medication or psychotherapy. Radically open dialectical behaviour therapy (RO DBT) is a new treatment targeting overcontrolled personality, common in refractory depression. AIMS: To compare RO DBT plus treatment as usual (TAU) for refractory depression with TAU alone (trial registration: ISRCTN 85784627). METHOD: RO DBT comprised 29 therapy sessions and 27 skills classes over 6 months. Our completed randomised trial evaluated RO DBT for refractory depression over 18 months in three British secondary care centres. Of 250 adult participants, we randomised 162 (65%) to RO DBT. The primary outcome was the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD), assessed masked and analysed by treatment allocated. RESULTS: After 7 months, immediately following therapy, RO DBT had significantly reduced depressive symptoms by 5.40 points on the HRSD relative to TAU (95% CI 0.94-9.85). After 12 months (primary end-point), the difference of 2.15 points on the HRSD in favour of RO DBT was not significant (95% CI -2.28 to 6.59); nor was that of 1.69 points on the HRSD at 18 months (95% CI -2.84 to 6.22). Throughout RO DBT participants reported significantly better psychological flexibility and emotional coping than controls. However, they reported eight possible serious adverse reactions compared with none in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: The RO DBT group reported significantly lower HRSD scores than the control group after 7 months, but not thereafter. The imbalance in serious adverse reactions was probably because of the controls' limited opportunities to report these.

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 · 10.1192/bjp.2019.53

Cites

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?

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 27 · Cited by 38

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [8]Riso LP, du Toit PL, Blandino JA, Penna S, Dacey S, Dui JS, Cognitive aspects of chronic depression. J Abnorm Psychol 2003; 112: 72– 80. 12653415
  2. [9]Lynch TR. Radically Open Dialectical Behavior Therapy: Theory and Practice for Treating Disorders of Overcontrol. Context Press, 2018.
  3. [14]First MB, Spitzer RL, Gibbon M, Williams JBW. Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR Axis I Disorders, Research Version, Patient Edition (SCID-I/P). New York State Psychiatric Institute, 2002.

Authors
Lynch, T. R., Hempel, R. J., Whalley, B., Byford, S., Chamba, R., Clarke, P., Clarke, S., Kingdon, D. G., O'Mahen, H., Remington, B., Rushbrook, S. C., Shearer, J., Stanton, M., Swales, M., Watkins, A., & Russell, I. T.
Affiliations
  • University of Southampton (GB)
  • University of Plymouth (GB)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University of Essex (GB)
  • Dorset HealthCare University NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • Bangor University (GB)
  • Swansea University (GB)
Corresponding author
Lynch, Thomas R.
Venue
The British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2019-07-18
Volume
216
Issue
4
Pages
204-212
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2963243720
Cited by
38
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1
FWCI
5.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PEARL (University of Plymouth) (submittedVersion)
  • Open Access at Essex (University of Essex) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Bangor University Research Portal (Bangor University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Health and Care Research Wales
  • Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board
  • Dorset HealthCare University NHS Foundation Trust
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (09/150/12)
  • Department of Health and Social Care
  • Department of Biotechnology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India
  • Public Health Agency
  • Medical Research Council
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/S012486/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
treatment-resistant depression, psychological flexibility, emotional coping, adverse effects, treatment efficacy, secondary care
MeSH terms
Dialectical Behavior Therapy, Adult, Major Depressive Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Major, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychotherapeutic Processes, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant, Secondary Health Care, Secondary Care

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