Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCipriani, Andrea
dc.date.accessioned2021-10-26T14:15:10Z
dc.date.available2021-10-26T14:15:10Z
dc.date.issued2021-10
dc.identifier.citationYajie Xiang, Andrea Cipriani, Teng Teng, Cinzia Del Giovane, Yuqing Zhang, John R. Weisz, Xuemei Li, Pim Cuijpers, Xueer Liu, Jürgen Barth, Yuanliang Jiang, David Cohen, Li Fan, Donna Gillies, Kang Du, Arun V. Ravindran, Xinyu Zhou,Peng Xie. Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for post-traumatic stress disorder in children and adolescents: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Evidence-Based Mental Health Volume 24, Issue 4 October 2021en
dc.identifier.urihttps://oxfordhealth-nhs.archive.knowledgearc.net/handle/123456789/961
dc.descriptionThis is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.en
dc.description.abstractBackground Available evidence on the comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in children and adolescents remains uncertain. Objective We aimed to compare and rank the different types and formats of psychotherapies for PTSD in children and adolescents. Methods We searched eight databases and other international registers up to 31 December 2020. The pairwise meta-analyses and frequentist network meta-analyses estimated pooled standardised mean differences (SMDs) and ORs with random-effects model. Efficacy at post-treatment and follow-up, acceptability, depressive and anxiety symptoms were measured. Findings We included 56 randomised controlled trials with 5327 patients comparing 14 different types of psychotherapies and 3 control conditions. For efficacy, cognitive processing therapy (CPT), behavioural therapy (BT), individual trauma-focused cognitive–behavioural therapy (TF-CBT), eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing, and group TF-CBT were significantly superior to all control conditions at post-treatment and follow-up (SMDs between −2.42 and −0.25). Moreover, CPT, BT and individual TF-CBT were more effective than supportive therapy (SMDs between −1.92 and −0.49). Results for depressive and anxiety symptoms were similar to the findings for the primary outcome. Most of the results were rated as ‘moderate’ to ‘very low’ in terms of confidence of evidence. Conclusions CPT, BT and individual TF-CBT appear to be the best choices of psychotherapy for PTSD in young patients. Other types and different ways of delivering psychological treatment can be alternative options. Clinicians should consider the importance of each outcome and the patients’ preferences in real clinical practice.en
dc.description.sponsorshipSupported by the NIHRen
dc.description.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ebmental-2021-300346en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subjectPost-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)en
dc.subjectChildren and Adolescentsen
dc.titleComparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for post-traumatic stress disorder in children and adolescents: a systematic review and network meta-analysisen
dc.typeArticleen


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record