Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
What does best evidence tell us about the efficacy of group cognitive-behavioral therapy for obsessive-compulsive disorder? Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
Miller Institute of Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, Genoa, Italy..
Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. (Internet, health and clinical psychology research group)ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4753-6745
Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy..
2015 (English)In: Psychology Research and Behavior Management, ISSN 1179-1578, E-ISSN 1179-1578, Vol. 11, 225-230 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Group cognitive-behavioral therapy (GCBT) may be a cost-effective alternative modality for the treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). In the last decade, a great deal of research has been conducted to evaluate the efficacy of GCBT for OCD. Despite promising results, studies have produced inconclusive evidence. The current paper will present a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of GCBT compared with control conditions or individual CBT at post-treatment and follow-up on OCD symptoms, anxiety, depression, obsessive beliefs, quality of life, and functioning. Another aim will be to compare the levels of early drop out from GCBT relative to control conditions or individual CBT. Finally, the study will investigate potential outcome moderators (age, sex, OCD severity, severity of concurrent depression, comorbid personality disorders, duration of OCD symptom onset, duration of treatment, intensity of treatment, generation cohort, methodological quality, and publication date). A systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines will be conducted using random-effects meta-analyses. Online databases and trial registries will be searched, the corresponding authors will be contacted, and conference proceedings and relevant journals will be hand-searched to locate published and unpublished studies. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2015. Vol. 11, 225-230 p.
National Category
Applied Psychology Nursing
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-123227DOI: 10.2147/PRBM.S83872PubMedID: 26345233OAI: diva2:878317
Available from: 2015-12-08 Created: 2015-12-08 Last updated: 2016-01-14

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(255 kB)74 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 255 kBChecksum SHA-512
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Andersson, Gerhard
By organisation
PsychologyFaculty of Arts and Sciences
In the same journal
Psychology Research and Behavior Management
Applied PsychologyNursing

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 74 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 279 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link