4.5 Article

Efficacy of peer support interventions for depression: a meta-analysis

Journal

GENERAL HOSPITAL PSYCHIATRY
Volume 33, Issue 1, Pages 29-36

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2010.10.002

Keywords

Systematic; Review; Self-help; Mutual; Depressed; Psychotherapy

Categories

Funding

  1. VA Health Services Research & Development Service [IIR 08-325]
  2. Michigan Diabetes Research and Training Center (NIH) [DK020572]
  3. Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research (NIH) [UL1RR024986]
  4. NATIONAL CENTER FOR RESEARCH RESOURCES [UL1RR024986] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  5. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES [P60DK020572] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To assess the efficacy of peer support for reducing symptoms of depression. Methods: Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL and CENTRAL databases were searched for clinical trials published as of April 2010 using Medical Subject Headings and free text terms related to depression and peer support. Two independent reviewers selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared a peer support intervention for depression to usual care or a psychotherapy control condition. Meta-analyses were conducted to generate pooled standardized mean differences (SMD) in the change in depressive symptoms between study conditions. Results: Seven RCTs of peer support vs. usual care for depression involving 869 participants were identified. Peer support interventions were superior to usual care in reducing depressive symptoms, with a pooled SMD of -0.59 (95% CI, -0.98 to -0.21; P=.002). Seven RCTs with 301 total participants compared peer support to group cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). There was no statistically significant difference between group CBT and peer interventions, with a pooled SMD of 0.10 (95% CI, -0.20 to 0.39, P=.53). Conclusion: Based on the available evidence, peer support interventions help reduce symptoms of depression. Additional studies arc needed to determine effectiveness in primary care and other settings with limited mental health resources. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available