Back to Journals » Psychology Research and Behavior Management » Volume 8

What does best evidence tell us about the efficacy of group cognitive–behavioral therapy for obsessive–compulsive disorder? Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

Authors Pozza A, Andersson G, Dèttore D

Received 3 March 2015

Accepted for publication 4 May 2015

Published 6 August 2015 Volume 2015:8 Pages 225—230

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S83872

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 4

Editor who approved publication: Professor Igor Elman


Andrea Pozza,1,2 Gerhad Andersson,3 Davide Dèttore2,4

1Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy; 2Miller Institute of Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, Genoa, Italy; 3Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden; 4Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy

Abstract: Group cognitive–behavioral therapy (GCBT) may be a cost-effective alternative modality for the treatment of obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD). In the last decade, a great deal of research has been conducted to evaluate the efficacy of GCBT for OCD. Despite promising results, studies have produced inconclusive evidence. The current paper will present a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of GCBT compared with control conditions or individual CBT at post-treatment and follow-up on OCD symptoms, anxiety, depression, obsessive beliefs, quality of life, and functioning. Another aim will be to compare the levels of early drop out from GCBT relative to control conditions or individual CBT. Finally, the study will investigate potential outcome moderators (age, sex, OCD severity, severity of concurrent depression, comorbid personality disorders, duration of OCD symptom onset, duration of treatment, intensity of treatment, generation cohort, methodological quality, and publication date). A systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines will be conducted using random-effects meta-analyses. Online databases and trial registries will be searched, the corresponding authors will be contacted, and conference proceedings and relevant journals will be hand-searched to locate published and unpublished studies. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool.

Keywords: obsessive–compulsive disorder, cognitive–behavioral therapy, meta-analysis, group therapy

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]