Allegiance effects in cognitive processing therapy (CPT) for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD): a systematic review and meta-analysis

Maddox, CS; Berle, D

Allegiance effects in cognitive processing therapy (CPT) for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD): a systematic review and meta-analysis

Maddox, CS Berle, D

Permalink

Publisher:: TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Clinical Psychologist, 2024, 28, (2), pp. 79-93
Issue Date:: 2024-01-01

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Published versionAdobe PDF (2.52 MB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Maddox, CS
dc.contributor.author	Berle, D https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4861-2220
dc.date.accessioned	2024-09-27T04:43:29Z
dc.date.available	2024-09-27T04:43:29Z
dc.date.issued	2024-01-01
dc.identifier.citation	Clinical Psychologist, 2024, 28, (2), pp. 79-93
dc.identifier.issn	1328-4207
dc.identifier.issn	1742-9552
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/181033
dc.description.abstract	Objective: We sought to determine whether there is evidence of researcher allegiance bias in the reporting of cognitive processing therapy (CPT) for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Method: We used a reprint analysis approach–whereby papers were coded for indications of potential bias–to determine the presence and magnitude of researcher allegiance in published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of CPT. Results: Twenty trials met inclusion criteria. Evidence of allegiance to CPT rather than the respective comparison conditions was typically small to negligible. A meta-regression analysis of the 17 studies which included an active comparison group did not find an association between allegiance scores and study effect size for the reduction of PTSD symptoms (95% CI: −0.05, 0.19). Conclusion: There is no evidence at present that the CPT literature has been unduly influenced by allegiance held to CPT or the comparator conditions.
dc.language	English
dc.publisher	TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
dc.relation.ispartof	Clinical Psychologist
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1080/13284207.2024.2347643
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subject	1701 Psychology, 1702 Cognitive Sciences
dc.subject.classification	5201 Applied and developmental psychology
dc.subject.classification	5203 Clinical and health psychology
dc.title	Allegiance effects in cognitive processing therapy (CPT) for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD): a systematic review and meta-analysis
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	28
utslib.for	1701 Psychology
utslib.for	1702 Cognitive Sciences
pubs.organisational-group	University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health
utslib.copyright.status	open_access	*
dc.rights.license	This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.date.updated	2024-09-27T04:43:27Z
pubs.issue	2
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	28
utslib.citation.issue	2

Abstract:

Objective: We sought to determine whether there is evidence of researcher allegiance bias in the reporting of cognitive processing therapy (CPT) for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Method: We used a reprint analysis approach–whereby papers were coded for indications of potential bias–to determine the presence and magnitude of researcher allegiance in published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of CPT. Results: Twenty trials met inclusion criteria. Evidence of allegiance to CPT rather than the respective comparison conditions was typically small to negligible. A meta-regression analysis of the 17 studies which included an active comparison group did not find an association between allegiance scores and study effect size for the reduction of PTSD symptoms (95% CI: −0.05, 0.19). Conclusion: There is no evidence at present that the CPT literature has been unduly influenced by allegiance held to CPT or the comparator conditions.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/181033