Cited by 61Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments

Efficacy of “attachment-based compassion therapy” in the treatment of fibromyalgia: A randomized controlled trial

Open access
Montero-Marín, Jesús, Navarro-Gil, Mayte, Puebla-Guedea, Marta, Luciano, Juan V., Van Gordon, William, Shonin, Edo, García-Campayo, Javier·2018·Frontiers in Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: There is a growing interest in evaluating the effectiveness of compassion interventions for treating psychological disorders. The present study evaluated the effectiveness of "attachment-based compassion therapy" (ABCT) in the treatment of fibromyalgia (FM), and the role of psychological flexibility as a mediator of improvements. METHODS: A total of 42 patients with FM were randomly assigned to ABCT or relaxation (active control group). Both the intervention and control condition were combined with treatment as usual (TAU). The primary outcome was functional status (FIQ), and the secondary outcomes were clinical severity (CGI-S), pain catastrophizing (PCS), anxiety (HADS-A), depression (HADS-D), quality of life (EQ-5D), and psychological flexibility (AAQ-II). Differences between the groups were estimated using mixed-effects models, and mediation assessments were conducted using path analyses. RESULTS: = 0.001). The absolute risk reduction in ABCT compared to relaxation increased by 40.0%, with an NNT = 3 based on criteria of ≥50% FIQ reduction after treatment. Psychological flexibility had a significant mediating effect on improvements. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that ABCT combined with TAU appears to be effective in the treatment of FM symptoms. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT02454244.

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 · 10.3389/fpsyt.2017.00307

Cites

47 of 47 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?

  • Adherence to the intervention was not enhanced compared with previous studies that used the original ABCT protocol.

    “However, adherence to the intervention was not enhanced compared with previous studies that used the original ABCT protocol.”

    From Attachment-Based Compassion Therapy for Reducing Anxiety and Depression in Fibromyalgia (2022) · cites this paper as [16]

    The Results section, “Participants’ Flow and Compliance” (page unavailable), reports that participants attended a mean of 81.5% of ABCT sessions. It compares attendance with the relaxation group, not with previous studies using the original ABCT protocol, so it does not establish whether adherence was enhanced relative to those studies. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Montero-Marín et al. concluded that ABCT improved fibromyalgia symptomatology compared with a relaxation program and that this effect was maintained at a 3-month follow-up.

    “The study conducted by Montero-Marín et al. [16] concluded that ABCT improved fibromyalgia symptomatology compared with a relaxation program and that this effect was maintained at a 3-month follow-up”
  • Montero-Marín et al. reported an average adherence of 81.5% of sessions attended.

    “they reported a notable adherence to the intervention (i.e., 81.5% of sessions attended, on average)”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Montero-Marín, J., Navarro-Gil, M., Puebla-Guedea, M., Luciano, J. V., Van Gordon, W., Shonin, E., & García-Campayo, J.
Affiliations
Red de Investigación en Actividades Preventivas y Promoción de la Salud (ES)
Venue
Frontiers in Psychiatry
Published
2018-01-16
Volume
8
Pages
307-307
ISSN
1664-0640 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2784123797
Cited by
61
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 1
FWCI
6.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Derby Online Research Archive. (University of Derby) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Zaguan (University of Zaragoza Repository) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Keywords
fibromyalgia, psychological flexibility, pain catastrophizing, mediation, functional status, anxiety, depression, quality of life, usual 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