4.4 Review

The state of personalized treatment for anxiety disorders: A systematic review of treatment moderators

期刊

CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW
卷 38, 期 -, 页码 39-54

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2015.02.004

关键词

Moderators; Anxiety disorders; Treatment outcome; Cognitive-behavioral therapy; Personalized medicine; Treatment moderation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: The aim of this review was to synthesize findings for moderators of treatment outcome across adult anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and posttraumatic stress disorder. Methods: Twenty-four papers that compared two or more active treatments (at least one of which was a form of cognitive behavioral therapy [CBT]) were identified and organized into five treatment comparison categories (distinct psychotherapy combinations, CBT full package vs. single components, CBT vs. augmented CBT, CBT delivery methods, and CBT vs. pharmacotherapy). Sixty-three distinct baseline moderators were tested across seven categories (symptom severity, comorbid emotional disorders or emotional-reactivity, cognitive maintenance factors, behavioral maintenance factors, personality traits and disorders, sociodemographic factors, and biological factors). Results: Few consistent treatment moderators were identified. All studies testing quadratic effects found at least one significant non-linear moderator or predictor effect. In addition, the majority of studies had methodological problems and limitations, demonstrating the need for future methodological improvements. Conclusion: Limited conclusions can be drawn about how to match anxiety disorder patients to treatment. A strong need to improve the methodological consistency and rigor of treatment moderator studies was identified. A series of recommendations for moderation analyses are proposed in order to strengthen future studies and facilitate replication efforts. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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