Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background And Objectives: Although cognitive behavioral group therapy (CBGT) is an effective treatment for social anxiety disorder, many socially anxious patients are still symptomatic after treatment. A possible improvement for CBGT could come from the more experiential group psychotherapy, psychodrama (PD). The integration of CBGT and PD (labeled CBPT) might offer an even more effective treatment than CBGT or PD alone. With the present study, we investigated first whether three kinds of group therapy (CBGT, PD, and CBPT) are superior to a waitlist (WL). Second, we investigated whether CBPT is more effective than CBGT or PD alone.
Methods: One hundred and forty-four social anxiety patients were randomly assigned to three active conditions or a WL. After wait, WL-participants were randomized over the active treatment conditions.
Results: The results of a multilevel analysis showed that all treatments were superior to WL in reducing social anxiety complaints. Only CBGT and CBPT differed significantly from WL in reducing fear of negative evaluations. There were no significant differences between active conditions in any of the variables after treatment and after six-month follow up, neither were there significant differences in treatment dropout.
Limitations: First there is the lack of a long-term follow-up. Second, because of loss of participants, we did not reach the planned numbers in the active treatment groups in comparison to WL. Moreover, this study was not designed as a non-inferiority or equivalence trial.
Conclusions: Although the integrative CBPT showed good results, it was not more effective than the other treatments.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2023.101908 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!