↓ Skip to main content

The long-term effectiveness of cognitive behavior therapy for psychosis within a routine psychological therapies service

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
20 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
176 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The long-term effectiveness of cognitive behavior therapy for psychosis within a routine psychological therapies service
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01658
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emmanuelle Peters, Tessa Crombie, Deborah Agbedjro, Louise C. Johns, Daniel Stahl, Kathryn Greenwood, Nadine Keen, Juliana Onwumere, Elaine Hunter, Laura Smith, Elizabeth Kuipers

Abstract

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have shown the efficacy of CBTp, however, few studies have considered its long-term effectiveness in routine services. This study reports the outcomes of clients seen in a psychological therapies clinic, set up following positive results obtained from an RCT (Peters et al., 2010). The aims were to evaluate the effectiveness of CBTp, using data from the service's routine assessments for consecutive referrals over a 12 years period, and assess whether gains were maintained at a 6+ months' follow-up. Of the 476 consenting referrals, all clients (N = 358) who received ≥5 therapy sessions were offered an assessment at four time points (baseline, pre-, mid-, and end of therapy) on measures assessing current psychosis symptoms, emotional problems, general well-being and life satisfaction. A sub-set (N = 113) was assessed at a median of 12 months after finishing therapy. Following the waiting list (median of 3 months) clients received individualized, formulation-based CBTp for a median number of 19 sessions from 121 therapists with a range of experience receiving regular supervision. Clients showed no meaningful change on any measure while on the waiting list (Cohen's d <= 0.23). In contrast, highly significant improvements following therapy, all of which were significantly greater than changes during the waiting list, were found on all domains assessed (Cohen's d: 0.44-0.75). All gains were maintained at follow-up (Cohen's d: 0.29-0.82), with little change between end of therapy and follow-up (Cohen's d <= 0.18). Drop-out rate from therapy was low (13%). These results demonstrate the positive and potentially enduring impact of psychological therapy on a range of meaningful outcomes for clients with psychosis. The follow-up assessments were conducted on only a sub-set, which may not generalize to the full sample. Nevertheless this study is the largest of its kind in psychosis, and has important implications for the practice of CBTp in clinical services.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 176 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Unknown 174 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 24%
Student > Bachelor 27 15%
Researcher 14 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 8%
Student > Postgraduate 12 7%
Other 31 18%
Unknown 35 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 78 44%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 10%
Neuroscience 7 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 4%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Other 12 7%
Unknown 49 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 April 2019.
All research outputs
#2,746,899
of 26,438,498 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#5,460
of 35,399 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,377
of 295,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#85
of 488 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,438,498 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,399 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 295,848 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 488 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.