uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Can Psychotherapists Function as Their Own Controls?: Meta-Analysis of the Crossed Therapist Design in Comparative Psychotherapy Trials
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Medicinska och farmaceutiska vetenskapsområdet, centrumbildningar mm, Centrum för klinisk forskning i Sörmland (CKFD).
Show others and affiliations
2013 (English)In: Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, ISSN 0160-6689, E-ISSN 1555-2101, Vol. 74, no 5, 482-491 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective: Clinical trials sometimes have the same therapists deliver more than 1 psychotherapy, ostensibly to control for therapist effects. This "crossed therapist" design makes controlling for therapist allegiance imperative, as therapists may prefer one treatment they deliver to the other(s). Research has established a strong relationship between principal investigators' allegiances and treatment outcome. Study therapists' allegiances probably also influence outcome, yet this moderating factor on outcome has never been studied. Data Sources: English language abstracts in PsycINFO and MEDLINE from January 1985 to December 2011 were searched for keywords psychotherapy and randomized trial. Study Selection:The search yielded 990 abstracts that were searched manually. Trials using the same therapists in more than 1 condition were included. Data Extraction: Thirty-nine studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. Meta-regression analyses assessed the influence of researchers' allegiance on treatment outcome, testing the hypothesis that studies poorly controlling for therapist allegiance would show stronger influence of researcher allegiance on outcome. A single-item measure assessed researchers' reported attempts to control for therapist allegiance. Results: Only 1 of 39 studies (3%) measured therapist treatment allegiance. Another 5 (13%) mentioned controlling for, without formally assessing, therapist allegiance. Most publications (67%) did not even mention therapist allegiance. In studies not controlling for therapist allegiance, researcher allegiance strongly influenced outcome, whereas studies reporting control for therapist allegiance showed no differential researcher allegiance. Researchers with cognitive-behavioral therapy allegiance described controlling for therapist allegiance less frequently than other researchers. Conclusions: The crossed therapist design is subject to bias due to differential psychotherapist allegiance. Worrisome results suggest that researchers strongly allied to a treatment may ignore therapist allegiance, potentially skewing outcomes. All clinical trials, and especially crossed therapist designs, should measure psychotherapist allegiance to evaluate this possible bias.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2013. Vol. 74, no 5, 482-491 p.
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-203678DOI: 10.4088/JCP.12r07848ISI: 000319890800004OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-203678DiVA: diva2:637448
Available from: 2013-07-18 Created: 2013-07-17 Last updated: 2013-07-18Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text
By organisation
Centrum för klinisk forskning i Sörmland (CKFD)
In the same journal
Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
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: 178 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link