scholarly journals Which patients benefit specifically from short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy (STPP) for depression? Study protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. e018900 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellen Driessen ◽  
Allan A Abbass ◽  
Jacques P Barber ◽  
Mary Beth Connolly Gibbons ◽  
Jack J M Dekker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychodynamic Psychotherapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Prospective Trial ◽  
Individual Participant Data ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Individual Participant ◽  
Meta Analyses

IntroductionShort-term psychodynamic psychotherapy (STPP) is an empirically supported treatment that is often used to treat depression. However, it is largely unclear if certain subgroups of depressed patients can benefit specifically from this treatment method. We describe the protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data (IPD) aimed at identifying predictors and moderators of STPP for depression efficacy.Method and analysisWe will conduct a systematic literature search in multiple bibliographic databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase.com, Web of Science and Cochrane’s Central Register of Controlled Trials), ‘grey literature’ databases (GLIN and UMI ProQuest) and a prospective trial register (http://www.controlled-trials.com). We will include studies reporting (a) outcomes on standardised measures of (b) depressed (c) adult patients (d) receiving STPP. We will next invite the authors of these studies to share the participant-level data of their trials and combine these data to conduct IPD meta-analyses. The primary outcome for this study is post-treatment efficacy as assessed by a continuous depression measure. Potential predictors and moderators include all sociodemographic variables, clinical variables and psychological patient characteristics that are measured before the start of treatment and are assessed consistently across studies. One-stage IPD meta-analyses will be conducted using mixed-effects models.Ethics and disseminationInstitutional review board approval is not required for this study. We intend to submit reports of the outcomes of this study for publication to international peer-reviewed journals in the fields of psychiatry or clinical psychology. We also intend to present the outcomes at international scientific conferences aimed at psychotherapy researchers and clinicians. The findings of this study can have important clinical implications, as they can inform expectations of STPP efficacy for individual patients, and help to make an informed choice concerning the best treatment option for a given patient.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017056029.

scholarly journals The efficacy of antidepressant medication and interpersonal psychotherapy for adult acute-phase depression: study protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data

BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellen Driessen ◽  
Zachary D. Cohen ◽  
Myrna M. Weissman ◽  
John C. Markowitz ◽  
Erica S. Weitz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Acute Phase ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Antidepressant Medication ◽  
Depression Treatment ◽  
Individual Participant Data ◽  
Individual Participant ◽  
Meta Analyses

Background Antidepressant medication and interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) are both recommended interventions in depression treatment guidelines based on literature reviews and meta-analyses. However, ‘conventional’ meta-analyses comparing their efficacy are limited by their reliance on reported study-level information and a narrow focus on depression outcome measures assessed at treatment completion. Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis, considered the gold standard in evidence synthesis, can improve the quality of the analyses when compared with conventional meta-analysis. Aims We describe the protocol for a systematic review and IPD meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of antidepressants and IPT for adult acute-phase depression across a range of outcome measures, including depressive symptom severity as well as functioning and well-being, at both post-treatment and follow-up (PROSPERO: CRD42020219891). Method We will conduct a systematic literature search in PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase and the Cochrane Library to identify randomised clinical trials comparing antidepressants and IPT in the acute-phase treatment of adults with depression. We will invite the authors of these studies to share the participant-level data of their trials. One-stage IPD meta-analyses will be conducted using mixed-effects models to assess treatment effects at post-treatment and follow-up for all outcome measures that are assessed in at least two studies. Conclusions This will be the first IPD meta-analysis examining antidepressants versus IPT efficacy. This study has the potential to enhance our knowledge of depression treatment by comparing the short- and long-term effects of two widely used interventions across a range of outcome measures using state-of-the-art statistical techniques.

scholarly journals Compliance With Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Individual Participant Data Statement for Meta-Analyses Published for Stroke Studies

Stroke ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fareed Jumah ◽  
Silky Chotai ◽  
Omar Ashraf ◽  
Michael S. Rallo ◽  
Bharath Raju ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Interquartile Range ◽  
Individual Participant Data ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Scoping Reviews ◽  
Individual Participant ◽  
Meta Analyses

Background and Purpose: Individual-participant data meta-analyses (IPD-MA) are powerful evidence synthesis studies which are considered the gold-standard of MA. The quality of reporting in these studies is guided by the 2015 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Individual Participant Data (PRISMA-IPD) guidelines. The growing number of IPD-MA published for stroke studies calls for an assessment of the compliance of these studies with the PRISMA-IPD statement. Methods: PubMed and EMBASE were searched for MA in stroke published between January 1, 2016, and March 30, 2020, in journals with impact factor >2. Literature reviews, scoping reviews, and aggregate MA were excluded. The final articles were scored using the 31-item PRISMA-IPD checklist. Results were depicted using descriptive statistics. Compliance with each item in PRISM-IPD guideline was recorded. The study was defined as compliant to IPD analyses if it satisfied all IPD specific items. Results: From an initial set of 321 articles, 31 met the final eligibility for data extraction. Only 4 (13%) described the use of PRISMA-IPD guidelines in their methodology, while 8/31 (26%) used the old PRISMA guidelines and 19/31 (61%) followed none. Regardless of mention of using IPD specific guidelines, 42% (n=13) of studies were compliant with all 4 IPD specific domains. The poorest areas of compliance were bias assessment within (32%) and across (39%) studies, reporting protocol and registration (42%), and reporting of IPD integrity (48%). The median journal impact factor was similar between the compliant (median, 8.1 [interquartile range, 5.4–39.9]) and noncompliant (median, 6 [interquartile range, 4.5–16.2]) groups ( P =0.24). Similarly, the journal, country of correspondence, number of authors, number of studies included in MA, study sample size, and funding source were statistically similar between the groups. Conclusions: For the published IPD-MA stroke studies, the compliance with PRISMA-IPD statement and compliance with 4 IPD specific items was suboptimal. The journal, author, and study-related factors were not associated with compliance. Additional scrutiny measures to ensure adherence to mandated guidelines might increase the compliance. Several avenues to improve compliance and ensure optimal adherence are discussed.

scholarly journals Subgrouping and TargetEd Exercise pRogrammes for knee and hip OsteoArthritis (STEER OA): a systematic review update and individual participant data meta-analysis protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (12) ◽  
pp. e018971 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melanie A Holden ◽  
Danielle L Burke ◽  
Jos Runhaar ◽  
Danielle van Der Windt ◽  
Richard D Riley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Physical Function ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Hip Osteoarthritis ◽  
Individual Participant Data ◽  
Therapeutic Exercise ◽  
Exercise Interventions ◽  
Individual Participant ◽  
Exercise Programmes ◽  
Meta Analyses

IntroductionKnee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) is a leading cause of disability worldwide. Therapeutic exercise is a recommended core treatment for people with knee and hip OA, however, the observed effect sizes for reducing pain and improving physical function are small to moderate. This may be due to insufficient targeting of exercise to subgroups of people who are most likely to respond and/or suboptimal content of exercise programmes. This study aims to identify: (1) subgroups of people with knee and hip OA that do/do not respond to therapeutic exercise and to different types of exercise and (2) mediators of the effect of therapeutic exercise for reducing pain and improving physical function. This will enable optimal targeting and refining the content of future exercise interventions.Methodsand analysisSystematic review and individual participant data meta-analyses. A previous comprehensive systematic review will be updated to identify randomised controlled trials that compare the effects of therapeutic exercise for people with knee and hip OA on pain and physical function to a non-exercise control. Lead authors of eligible trials will be invited to share individual participant data. Trial-level and participant-level characteristics (for baseline variables and outcomes) of included studies will be summarised. Meta-analyses will use a two-stage approach, where effect estimates are obtained for each trial and then synthesised using a random effects model (to account for heterogeneity). All analyses will be on an intention-to-treat principle and all summary meta-analysis estimates will be reported as standardised mean differences with 95% CI.Ethics and disseminationResearch ethical or governance approval is exempt as no new data are being collected and no identifiable participant information will be shared. Findings will be disseminated via national and international conferences, publication in peer-reviewed journals and summaries posted on websites accessed by the public and clinicians.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017054049.

scholarly journals The Contribution of “Individual Participant Data” Meta-Analyses of Psychotherapies for Depression to the Development of Personalized Treatments: A Systematic Review

2022 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 93
Author(s):  
Pim Cuijpers ◽  
Marketa Ciharova ◽  
Soledad Quero ◽  
Clara Miguel ◽  
Ellen Driessen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Statistical Power ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Individual Participant Data ◽  
Psychological Treatments ◽  
Gender Education ◽  
Individual Participant ◽  
Meta Analyses

While randomized trials typically lack sufficient statistical power to identify predictors and moderators of outcome, “individual participant data” (IPD) meta-analyses, which combine primary data of multiple randomized trials, can increase the statistical power to identify predictors and moderators of outcome. We conducted a systematic review of IPD meta-analyses on psychological treatments of depression to provide an overview of predictors and moderators identified. We included 10 (eight pairwise and two network) IPD meta-analyses. Six meta-analyses showed that higher baseline depression severity was associated with better outcomes, and two found that older age was associated with better outcomes. Because power was high in most IPD meta-analyses, non-significant findings are also of interest because they indicate that these variables are probably not relevant as predictors and moderators. We did not find in any IPD meta-analysis that gender, education level, or relationship status were significant predictors or moderators. This review shows that IPD meta-analyses on psychological treatments can identify predictors and moderators of treatment effects and thereby contribute considerably to the development of personalized treatments of depression.

scholarly journals Long working hours and alcohol use: systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies and unpublished individual participant data

BMJ ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 350 (jan12 13) ◽  
pp. g7772-g7772 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Virtanen ◽  
M. Jokela ◽  
S. T. Nyberg ◽  
I. E. H. Madsen ◽  
T. Lallukka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Alcohol Use ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Working Hours ◽  
Individual Participant Data ◽  
Long Working Hours ◽  
Individual Participant

scholarly journals Comparative efficacy and safety of interventions for treating head lice: a protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. e001129
Author(s):  
Bill Stevenson ◽  
Wubshet Tesfaye ◽  
Julia Christenson ◽  
Cynthia Mathew ◽  
Solomon Abrha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Head Lice ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Meta Analyses

BackgroundHead lice infestation is a major public health problem around the globe. Its treatment is challenging due to product failures resulting from rapidly emerging resistance to existing treatments, incorrect treatment applications and misdiagnosis. Various head lice treatments with different mechanism of action have been developed and explored over the years, with limited report on systematic assessments of their efficacy and safety. This work aims to present a robust evidence summarising the interventions used in head lice.MethodThis is a systematic review and network meta-analysis which will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement for network meta-analyses. Selected databases, including PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be systematically searched for randomised controlled trials exploring head lice treatments. Searches will be limited to trials published in English from database inception till 2021. Grey literature will be identified through Open Grey, AHRQ, Grey Literature Report, Grey Matters, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry and International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number registry. Additional studies will be sought from reference lists of included studies. Study screening, selection, data extraction and assessment of methodological quality will be undertaken by two independent reviewers, with disagreements resolved via a third reviewer. The primary outcome measure is the relative risk of cure at 7 and 14 days postinitial treatment. Secondary outcome measures may include adverse drug events, ovicidal activity, treatment compliance and acceptability, and reinfestation. Information from direct and indirect evidence will be used to generate the effect sizes (relative risk) to compare the efficacy and safety of individual head lice treatments against a common comparator (placebo and/or permethrin). Risk of bias assessment will be undertaken by two independent reviewers using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the certainty of evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations guideline for network meta-analysis. All quantitative analyses will be conducted using STATA V.16.DiscussionThe evidence generated from this systematic review and meta-analysis is intended for use in evidence-driven treatment of head lice infestations and will be instrumental in informing health professionals, public health practitioners and policy-makers.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017073375.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document