Cited by 34Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

Six-Month Outcomes From a Randomized Trial Augmenting Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors With Exposure and Response Prevention or Risperidone in Adults With Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder

Open access
Foa, Edna B., Simpson, Helen Blair, Rosenfield, David, Liebowitz, Michael R., Cahill, Shawn P., Huppert, Jonathan D., Bender Jr, James, McLean, Carmen P. +10 more·2015·The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes after 6-month maintenance treatment of adults diagnosed with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) based on DSM-IV criteria who responded to acute treatment with serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SRIs) augmented by exposure and response prevention (EX/RP) or risperidone. METHOD: A randomized trial was conducted at 2 academic sites from January 2007 through December 2012. In the acute phase, 100 patients on therapeutic SRI dose with at least moderate OCD severity were randomized to 8 weeks of EX/RP, risperidone, or pill placebo. Responders entered the 6-month maintenance phase, continuing the augmentation strategy they received acutely (n = 30 EX/RP, n = 8 risperidone). Independent evaluations were conducted every month. The main outcome was the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS). RESULTS: Intent-to-treat analyses indicated that, after 6-month maintenance treatment, EX/RP yielded OCD outcomes that were superior to risperidone (Y-BOCS = 10.95 vs 18.70; t40 = 2.76, P = .009); more patients randomized to EX/RP met response criteria (Y-BOCS decrease ≥ 25%: 70% vs 20%; P < .001) and achieved minimal symptoms (Y-BOCS ≤ 12: 50% vs 5%; P < .001). During maintenance, OCD severity decreased slightly in both conditions (Y-BOCS decrease = 2.2 points, P = .020). Lower Y-BOCS at entry to maintenance was associated with more improvement in both conditions (r38 = 0.57, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: OCD patients taking SRIs who responded to acute EX/RP or risperidone maintained their gains over 6-month maintenance. Because EX/RP patients improved more during acute treatment than risperidone-treated patients, and both maintained their gains during maintenance, EX/RP yielded superior outcomes 6 months later. The findings that 50% of patients randomized to EX/RP had minimal symptoms at 6-month maintenance, a rate double that of prior studies, suggests that EX/RP maintenance helps maximize long-term outcome. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00389493.

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 · 10.4088/jcp.14m09044

Cites

29 of 29 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?

  • Individuals taking SRIs had lower OCD severity scores immediately and 6 months following additional treatment with ERP than those who had additional treatment with risperidone or placebo.

    “individuals taking SRIs had lower OCD severity scores immediately[24] and 6 months[25] following additional treatment with ERP than those who had additional treatment with risperidone or placebo”

    From Exposure and response prevention for obsessive-compulsive disorder: A review and new directions (2019) · cites this paper as [25]

    The Abstract Results report lower OCD severity at six months with exposure and response prevention (EX/RP) than with risperidone (Y-BOCS 10.95 versus 18.70). The Method’s Data Analysis section says the six-month analyses excluded the placebo group, so this source does not support a six-month comparison with placebo. The immediate-treatment comparison is attached to a different citation [24]. Page numbers were not provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [16]First MB Spitzer RL Gibbon M Williams JB Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders-Patient Edition 1996 New York, NY Biometrics Research Department, New York State Psychiatric Institute
  2. [31]Hedeker D Gibbons RD Longitudinal Data Analysis 2006 Hoboken John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  3. [32]Maas Cora JM Hox Joop J Sufficient sample sizes for multilevel modeling Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences 2005 86 92 1.3
  4. [33]Singer JD Willett JB Applied Longitudinal Data Analysis 2003 New York Oxford University Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Foa, E. B., Simpson, H. B., Rosenfield, D., Liebowitz, M. R., Cahill, S. P., Huppert, J. D., Bender Jr, J., McLean, C. P., Maher, M. J., Campeas, R., Hahn, C.-G., Imms, P., Pinto, A., Powers, M. B., Rodriguez, C. I., Van Meter, P. E., Vermes, D., & Williams, M. T.
Affiliations
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • New York State Psychiatric Institute (US)
  • Southern Methodist University (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee (US)
  • Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
  • University of Louisville (US)
Venue
The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
Published
2014-10-14
Volume
76
Issue
04
Pages
440-446
ISSN
0160-6689 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1996493576
Cited by
34
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1
FWCI
2.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Bristol-Myers Squibb
  • Yale University
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH045404, R01MH-45404, K23MH092434, R01MH045436, R01MH-45436)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
obsessive-compulsive disorder, exposure and response prevention, risperidone, serotonin reuptake inhibitors, augmentation therapy, maintenance therapy, long-term outcomes, Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale, atypical antipsychotics, treatment-resistant OCD, relapse prevention
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Combined Modality Therapy, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Implosive Therapy, Male, Middle Aged, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, United States, Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors, Risperidone, Young Adult

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