Cited by 51Schizophrenia research and treatmentPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsMental Health and Psychiatry

Efficacy of psychological treatments for patients with schizophrenia and relevant negative symptoms: A meta-analysis

Open access
Riehle, Marcel, Böhl, Mara Cristine, Pillny, Matthias, Lincoln, Tania Marie·2020·Clinical Psychology in Europe

Abstract

Background: Recent meta-analyses on the efficacy of psychological treatments for the negative symptoms of schizophrenia included mostly trials that had not specifically targeted negative symptoms. To gauge the efficacy of such treatments in the target patient population – namely people with schizophrenia who experience negative symptoms – we conducted a meta-analysis of controlled trials that had established an inclusion criterion for relevant negative symptom severity. Method: We conducted a systematic literature search and calculated random-effects meta-analyses for controlled post-treatment effects and for pre-post changes within treatment arms. Separate analyses were conducted for different therapeutic approaches. Our primary outcome was reduction in negative symptoms; secondary outcomes were amotivation, reduced expression, and functioning. Results: Twelve studies matched our inclusion criteria, testing Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) vs. treatment-as-usual (k = 6), Cognitive Remediation (CR) vs. treatment-as-usual (k = 2), CBT vs. CR (k = 2), and Body-oriented Psychotherapy (BPT) vs. supportive group counseling and vs. Pilates (k = 1 each). Accordingly, meta-analyses were performed for CBT vs. treatment-as-usual, CR vs. treatment-as-usual, and CBT vs. CR. CBT and CR both outperformed treatment-as-usual in reducing negative symptoms (CBT: Hedges’ g = -0.46; CR: g = -0.59). There was no difference between CBT and CR (g = 0.12). Significant pre-post changes were found for CBT, CR, and to a lesser extent for treatment-as-usual, but not for BPT. Conclusion: Although effects for some approaches are promising, more high-quality trials testing psychological treatments for negative symptoms in their target population are needed to place treatment recommendations on a sufficiently firm foundation.

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 · 10.32872/cpe.v2i3.2899

Cites

63 of 63 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?

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

4 of the 67 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. NICE. (2014). Psychosis and schizophrenia in adults: Treatment and management: Updated edition 2014. Retrieved from https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg178 25340235
  2. Shadish, W. R., & Haddock, C. K. (2009). Combining estimates of effect size. In H. Cooper, L. V. Hedges, & J. C. Valentine (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd ed., pp. 257–277). New York, NY, USA: Russell Sage Foundation.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Riehle, M., Böhl, M. C., Pillny, M., & Lincoln, T. M.
Affiliations
Universität Hamburg (DE)
Corresponding author
Riehle, Marcel
Venue
Clinical Psychology in Europe
Published
2020-09-30
Volume
2
Issue
3
Pages
e2899-e2899
ISSN
2625-3410 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3090977961
Cited by
51
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2
FWCI
0.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology in Europe (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe’s Journal of Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • PsychOpen Gold (Leibniz Institute for Psychology) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
Keywords
schizophrenia, negative symptoms, psychological intervention, cognitive behavioral therapy, cognitive remediation, body psychotherapy, amotivation, reduced expressions, functioning, treatment efficacy

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