Eating Disorders Unit, 2nd Department of Psychiatry, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 'Attikon' University Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Departments of Health Promotion and Human Behavior and of Clinical Epidemiology, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine/School of Public Health, Kyoto, Japan.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2021 Apr;132:59-70. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.12.012. Epub 2020 Dec 15.
Control conditions' influence on effect estimates of active psychotherapeutic interventions for depression has not been fully elucidated. We used network meta-analysis to estimate the differences between control conditions.
We have conducted a comprehensive literature search of randomized trials of psychotherapies for adults with depression up to January 1, 2019 in four major databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, and Cochrane). The network meta-analysis included broadly conceived cognitive behavior therapies in comparison with the following control conditions: Waiting List (WL), No Treatment (NT), Pill Placebo (PillPlacebo), Psychological Placebo (PsycholPlacebo).
123 studies with 12,596 participants were included. The I-squared was 55.9% (95% CI: 45.9%; to 64.0%) (moderate heterogeneity). The design-by-treatment global test of inconsistency was not significant (P = 0.44). Different control conditions led to different estimates of efficacy for the same intervention. WL appears to be the weakest control (odds ratio of response against NT = 1.93 (1.30 to 2.86), PsycholPlacebo = 2.03 (1.21 to 3.39), and PillPlacebo = 2.66 (1.45 to 4.89), respectively).
Different control conditions produce different effect estimates in psychotherapy randomized controlled trials for depression. WL was the weakest, followed by NT, PsycholPlacebo, and PillPlacebo in this order. When conducting meta-analyses of psychotherapy trials, different control conditions should not be lumped into a single group.
尚未充分阐明对照条件对积极心理治疗干预抑郁症效果估计的影响。我们使用网络荟萃分析来估计对照条件之间的差异。
我们对截至 2019 年 1 月 1 日在四个主要数据库(PubMed、PsycINFO、Embase 和 Cochrane)中成人抑郁症心理治疗的随机试验进行了全面的文献搜索。网络荟萃分析包括广泛概念的认知行为疗法与以下对照条件进行比较:等待名单(WL)、无治疗(NT)、药丸安慰剂(PillPlacebo)、心理安慰剂(PsycholPlacebo)。
共纳入 123 项研究,涉及 12596 名参与者。I²为 55.9%(95%CI:45.9%至 64.0%)(中度异质性)。治疗设计全局不一致检验不显著(P=0.44)。不同的对照条件导致同一干预措施的疗效估计不同。WL 似乎是最薄弱的对照(与 NT 相比,反应的优势比为 1.93(1.30 至 2.86),与 PsycholPlacebo 相比为 2.03(1.21 至 3.39),与 PillPlacebo 相比为 2.66(1.45 至 4.89))。
不同的对照条件在抑郁症心理治疗随机对照试验中产生不同的效果估计。WL 是最薄弱的,其次是 NT、PsycholPlacebo 和 PillPlacebo。在进行心理治疗试验的荟萃分析时,不应将不同的对照条件归为一组。