Review2012

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depression in Older People: A Meta‐Analysis and Meta‐Regression of Randomized Controlled Trials

Rebecca L. Gould · Mark Coulson · Robert J. Howard

201 citations0/0 files storedJournal of the American Geriatrics Society

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications Psychological Treatments and Assessments

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To review the effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for depression in older people, together with factors associated with its efficacy. DESIGN: Online literature databases and registers were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of CBT for depression in older people. Random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression were conducted. SETTING: Studies involving participants from the community and inpatient and outpatient clinical settings were included in the meta-analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Older people with major or minor depression, dysthymia, or depressive symptoms. MEASUREMENTS: Evidence-based outcome measures of depression. RESULTS: Four hundred eighty-five studies were identified, of which 23 were included. At the end of the intervention, CBT was significantly more effective at reducing depressive symptoms (irrespective of whether rated by clinicians or participants) than treatment as usual (TAU) or being on a waiting list but not than active controls. The same pattern of results was found for 6-month follow-up. At all other time-points, pooled effect sizes in favor of CBT were nonsignificant. Clinician-rated outcome measures resulted in larger effect sizes in favor of CBT than self-rated measures. No significant differences in efficacy were found between CBT and other treatment (pharmacotherapy and other psychotherapies). Meta-regression analyses revealed four factors that predicted effect sizes for comparisons between CBT and control conditions, including whether concurrent pharmacotherapy was allowed. CONCLUSION: CBT for depression in older people is more effective than waiting list or TAU, but greater efficacy than active controls or other treatment has not been demonstrated. More high-quality RCTs comparing CBT with active controls need to be conducted before firm conclusions can be drawn about the efficacy of CBT for depression in older people. Other treatment approaches that could be contrasted with or augment CBT (e.g., pharmacotherapy) also need to be explored further.

Citations in this library

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 201 citations exist upstream.

References

2003Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses 2002Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis 2008Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.1. The Cochrane Collaboration 2007Estimating Effect Sizes From Pretest-Posttest-Control Group Designs 2000Association between depression and mortality in older adults: the Cardiovascular Health Study.2009The effects of psychotherapy for adult depression are overestimated: a meta-analysis of study quality and effect size 1987Comparative effectiveness of psychotherapies for depressed elders.1994Age Differences in the Symptoms of Depression: A Latent Trait Analysis

Cited by

2014Managing depression in older age: Psychological interventions 2019Cognitive behavioral therapy for primary care depression and anxiety: a secondary meta-analytic review using robust variance estimation in meta-regression 2018Who benefits from psychotherapies for adult depression? A meta-analytic update of the evidence 2017Non-pharmacological treatment for depressed older patients in primary care: A systematic review and meta-analysis 2017Personalized feedback on symptom dynamics of psychopathology: A proof-of-principle study

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.