The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Randomised controlled trial of non-directive counselling, cognitive-behaviour therapy and usual general practitioner care in the management of depression as well as mixed anxiety and depression in primary care.
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine both the clinical and cost-effectiveness of usual general practitioner (GP) care compared with two types of brief psychological therapy (non-directive counselling and cognitive-behaviour therapy) in the management of depression as well as mixed anxiety and depression in the primary care setting. DESIGN: The design was principally a pragmatic randomised controlled trial, but was accompanied by two additional allocation methods allowing patient preference: the option of a specific choice of treatment (preference allocation) and the option to be randomised between the psychological therapies only. Of the 464 patients allocated to the three treatments, 197 were randomised between the three treatments, 137 chose a specific treatment, and 130 were randomised between the psychological therapies only. The patients underwent follow-up assessments at 4 and 12 months. SETTING: The study was conducted in 24 general practices in Greater Manchester and London. SUBJECTS: A total of 464 eligible patients, aged 18 years and over, were referred by 73 GPs and allocated to one of the psychological therapies or usual GP care for depressive symptoms. INTERVENTIONS: The interventions consisted of brief psychological therapy (12 sessions maximum) or usual GP care. Non-directive counselling was provided by counsellors who were qualified for accreditation by the British Association for Counselling. Cognitive-behaviour therapy was provided by clinical psychologists who were qualified for accreditation by the British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies. Usual GP care included discussions with patients and the prescription of medication, but GPs were asked to refrain from referring patients for psychological intervention for at least 4 months. Most therapy sessions took place on a weekly basis in the general practices. By the 12-month follow-up, GP care in some cases did include referral to mental healthcare specialists. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The clinical outcomes included depressive symptoms, general psychiatric symptoms, social function and patient satisfaction. The economic outcomes included direct and indirect costs and quality of life. Assessments were carried out at baseline during face-to-face interviews as well as at 4 and 12 months in person or by post. RESULTS: At 4 months, both psychological therapies had reduced depressive symptoms to a significantly greater extent than usual GP care. Patients in the psychological therapy groups exhibited mean scores on the Beck Depression Inventory that were 4-5 points lower than the mean score of patients in the usual GP care group, a difference that was also clinically significant. These differences did not generalize to other measures of outcome. There was no significant difference in outcome between the two psychological therapies when they were compared directly using all 260 patients randomised to a psychological therapy by either randomised allocation method. At 12 months, the patients in all three groups had improved to the same extent. The lack of a significant difference between the treatment groups at this point resulted from greater improvement of the patients in the GP care group between the 4- and 12-month follow-ups. At 4 months, patients in both psychological therapy groups were more satisfied with their treatment than those in the usual GP care group. However, by 12 months, patients who had received non-directive counselling were more satisfied than those in either of the other two groups. There were few differences in the baseline characteristics of patients who were randomised or expressed a treatment preference, and no differences in outcome between these patients. Similar outcomes were found for patients who chose either psychological therapy. Again, there were no significant differences between the two groups at 4 or 12 months. Patients who chose counselling were more satisfied with treatment than those who chose c
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
EuroQol: a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life
(1990) · Health Policy · doi:10.1016/0168-8510(90)90421-9 · Cited by 15,736
The brief symptom inventory: an introductory report.
Derogatis, L. R., & Melisaratos, N. (1983) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291700048017 · Cited by 6,650
Schulz (1995) · doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520290060030 · Cited by 5,634
Elkin, I. (1989) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1989.01810110013002 · Cited by 2,300
The effectiveness of psychotherapy: the Consumer Reports study
Seligman, M. E. P. (1995) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.50.12.965 · Cited by 1,608
Testing the integrity of a psychotherapy protocol: Assessment of adherence and competence
Waltz, J., Addis, M. E., Koerner, K., & Jacobson, N. S. (1993) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.61.4.620 · Cited by 873
Recognition and management of depression in general practice: consensus statement
Paykel, E. S., & Priest, R. G. (1992) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.305.6863.1198 · Cited by 540
Priest, R. G., Vize, C., Roberts, A., Roberts, M., & Tylee, A. (1996) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.313.7061.858 · Cited by 385
Cluster randomised trials: time for improvement
Campbell, M. K., & Grimshaw, J. M. (1998) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.317.7167.1171 · Cited by 154
Evaluation of a brief psychological treatment for emotional disorders in primary care
Catalan, J., Gath, D. H., Anastasiades, P., Bond, S. A. K., Day, A., & Hall, L. (1991) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291700030002 · Cited by 111
Cited by
Psychotherapy for depression in adults: A meta-analysis of comparative outcome studies.
Cuijpers, P., van Straten, A., Andersson, G., & van Oppen, P. (2008) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0013075 · Cited by 1,050
Manca, A., Hawkins, N., & Sculpher, M. J. (2005) · Health Economics · doi:10.1002/hec.944 · Cited by 1,024
Hobart, J., & Cano, S. (2009) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta13120 · Cited by 621
Evaluation of diagnostic tests when there is no gold standard. A review of methods
Rutjes, A., Reitsma, J., Coomarasamy, A., Khan, K., & Bossuyt, P. (2007) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta11500 · Cited by 524
Moher, D., Pham, B., Lawson, M., & Klassen, T. (2003) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta7410 · Cited by 500
Metadata
- Authors
- King, Sibbald, Ward, Bower, Lloyd, Gabbay, & Byford
- Venue
- Health Technology Assessment
- Published
- 2000
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 19
- Pages
- 1-83
- ISSN
- 1366-5278 (ISSN-L)
- 2046-4924
- OpenAlex
- W2136935040
- Cited by
- 274
- References
- 11
- FWCI
- 11.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- Funders
- Health Technology Assessment Programme (93/07/66)
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Randomised controlled trial of non-directive counselling, cognitive-behaviour therapy and usual general practitioner care in the management of depression as well as mixed anxiety and depression in primary care. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3310/hta4190
- The paper
- King, Sibbald, Ward, Bower, Lloyd, Gabbay, & Byford. (2000). Randomised controlled trial of non-directive counselling, cognitive-behaviour therapy and usual general practitioner care in the management of depression as well as mixed anxiety and depression in primary care. Health Technology Assessment. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta4190
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.