4.4 Article

The effect of depression on treatment outcome in social anxiety disorder: an individual-level meta-analysis

期刊

COGNITIVE BEHAVIOUR THERAPY
卷 51, 期 3, 页码 185-216

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/16506073.2021.1966089

关键词

Social anxiety disorder; depression; individual-level meta-analysis; cognitive behavior therapy; pharmacotherapy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that individuals with high levels of depression before treatment had greater reductions in social anxiety symptoms during treatment, but these effects were not significant at follow-up. Individual cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) and internet-delivered CBT were more effective for patients with severe depressive symptoms, while pharmacotherapy and group CBT did not show the same association.
Social anxiety disorder (SAD) is highly comorbid with depression. In the present meta-analysis, we conducted the first individual-level examination of the association between pre-treatment depression and improvement in social anxiety symptoms during treatment. We identified eligible studies on cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) and pharmacotherapy for SAD and contacted authors to obtain individual-level data. We obtained these data from 41 studies, including 46 treatment conditions (n = 4,381). Our results showed that individuals who had high levels of depression at pre-treatment experienced greater decreases in social anxiety symptoms from pre- to post-treatment, but not at follow-up. When analyzing treatment modalities (individual CBT, group CBT, internet-delivered CBT, and pharmacotherapy), we found that depressive symptoms were associated with better post-treatment outcomes for individual CBT and internet-delivered CBT, but not for pharmacotherapy or group CBT. Our findings suggest that depression does not negatively affect treatment outcome in SAD and may even lead to improved outcomes in some treatment formats. Clinical implications of these findings are discussed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据