Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2024 Nov 6:33:e56.
doi: 10.1017/S2045796024000611.

The overestimation of the effect sizes of psychotherapies for depression in waitlist controlled trials: a meta-analytic comparison with usual care controlled trials

Pim Cuijpers  1   2 , Clara Miguel  1 , Mathias Harrer  3 , Marketa Ciharova  1 , Eirini Karyotaki  1
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

The overestimation of the effect sizes of psychotherapies for depression in waitlist controlled trials: a meta-analytic comparison with usual care controlled trials

Pim Cuijpers et al. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. .

Abstract

Aims: There is considerable evidence that waiting list (WL) control groups overestimate the effect sizes of psychotherapies for depression. It is not clear, however, what are the exact causes for this overestimation. We decided to conduct a meta-analytic study to compare trials on psychotherapy for depression with a WL control group against trials with a care-as-usual (CAU) control group.

Methods: We used an existing meta-analytic database of randomized trials comparing psychological treatments of adult depression with control groups and selected trials using a WL or a CAU control group. We used subgroup and meta-regression analyses to examine differences in effect sizes between WL and CAU controlled trials.

Results: We included 333 randomized controlled trials (472 comparisons; total number participants: 41,480), 141 with a WL and 195 with a CAU control group (3 included both). We found several significant differences between WL and CAU controlled trials (in type of therapy examined, treatment format, recency, target group, recruitment strategy, number of treatment arms and number of depression outcome measures). The overall effect size indicating the difference between treatment and control at post-test for all comparisons was g = 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71; 0.84) with high heterogeneity (I2 = 84; 95% CI: 82; 85). A highly significant difference was observed between studies with a CAU control group (g = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.55; 0.71; I2 = 85; 95% CI: 83; 86) and studies with a WL (g = 0.95; 95% CI: 0.85; 1.04; I2 = 80; 95% CI: 78; 82; p for difference < 0.001). This difference remained significant in all sensitivity analyses, including a meta-regression analysis in which we adjusted for all differences in characteristics of studies with a WL versus CAU control group. We also found that pre-post effect sizes in WL control conditions (g = 0.37; 95% CI: 0.28; 0.46) were significantly smaller than change within CAU conditions (g = 0.64; 95% CI: 0.50; 0.78). We found few indications that pre-post effect sizes within therapy conditions differed between WL and CAU controlled trials.

Conclusions: WL control conditions considerably overestimate the effect sizes of psychological treatments, compared to trials using CAU control conditions. This overestimation is probably caused by a smaller improvement within the WL condition compared to the improvement in the CAU condition. WL control conditions should be avoided in randomized trials examining psychological treatments of adult depression.

Keywords: cognitive therapy; depression; randomized controlled trials; systematic reviews.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

All authors report no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Flowchart of the inclusion of studies.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Balduzzi S, Rücker G and Schwarzer G (2019) How to perform a meta-analysis with R: A practical tutorial. Evidence Based Mental Health 22, 153–160. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Beck AT, Steer RA and Brown GK (1996) BDI-II. Beck Depression Inventory Second Edition: Manual. San Antonio: Psychological Corporation.
    1. Beck AT, Ward CH, Mendelson M, Mock J and Erbaugh J (1961) An inventory for measuring depression. Archives of General Psychiatry 4, 561–571. - PubMed
    1. Cipriani A, Furukawa TA, Salanti G, Chaimani A, Atkinson LZ, Ogawa Y, Leucht S, Ruhe HG, Turner EH, Higgins JPT, Egger M, Takeshima N, Hayasaka Y, Imai H, Shinohara K, Tajika A, Ioannidis JPA and Geddes JR (2018) Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 21 antidepressant drugs for the acute treatment of adults with major depressive disorder: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Lancet 391, 1357–1366. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cox JL, Holden JM and Sagovsky R (1987) Detection of postnatal depression: Development of the 10-item Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. British Journal of Psychiatry 150, 782–786. - PubMed