Contradictions, methodological flaws, and potential for misinterpretations in ranking treatments of depression

In this journal Malhi et al. recommended cognitive-behavior therapy (CBT), antidepressants, and counseling ahead of short-term psychodynamic therapy (STPP) referring to UK NICE guidelines for depression. However, these recommendations continue the ambiguous and therefore confusing NICE guidelines, which on the one hand list the above treatments as equal options as first-line treatment for depression and emphasizes the importance of patient preference and implementations factors, but on the other hand rank these first-line treatments, implying superiority of some treatments over others. Furthermore, we highlight several methodological flaws of the NICE treatment ranking and that the NICE treatment ranking is not justified by NICE’s own and independent evidence and criteria. Presently it is not clear which patients benefit from which empirically-supported treatment. Thus, we continue to discourage the devaluing of efficacious treatments so that as many patients as possible may benefit from them

Psychological interventions for interoception in mental health disorders: A systematic review of randomized-controlled trials

Disturbed interoception (i.e., the sensing, awareness, and regulation of internal body signals) has been found across several mental disorders, leading to the development of interoception-based interventions (IBIs). Searching PubMed and PsycINFO, we conducted the first systematic review of randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the efficacy of behavioural IBIs at improving interoception and target symptoms of mental disorders in comparison to a non-interoception-based control condition [CRD42021297993]. Thirty-one RCTs fulfilled inclusion criteria. Across all studies, a pattern emerged with 20 (64.5%) RCTs demonstrating IBIs to be more efficacious at improving interoception compared to control conditions. The most promising results were found for post-traumatic stress disorder, irritable bowel syndrome, fibromyalgia and substance use disorders. Regarding symptom improvement, the evidence was inconclusive. The IBIs were heterogenous in their approach to improving interoception. The quality of RCTs was moderate to good. In conclusion, IBIs are potentially efficacious at improving interoception for some mental disorders. In terms of symptom reduction, the evidence is less promising. Future research on the efficacy of IBIs is needed. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

Algorithms, governance, and governmentality:on governing academic writing

Algorithms, or rather algorithmic actions, are seen as problematic because they are inscrutable, automatic, and subsumed in the flow of daily practices. Yet, they are also seen to be playing an important role in organizing opportunities, enacting certain categories, and doing what David Lyon calls ‘‘social sorting.’’ Thus, there is a general concern that this increasingly prevalent mode of ordering and organizing should be governed more explicitly. Some have argued for more transparency and openness, others have argued for more democratic or value-centered design of such actors. In this article, we argue that governing practices—of, and through algorithmic actors—are best understood in terms of what Foucault calls governmentality. Governmentality allows us to consider the performative nature of these governing practices. They allow us to show how practice becomes problematized, how calculative practices are enacted as technologies of governance, how such calculative practices produce domains of knowledge and expertise, and finally, how such domains of knowledge become internalized in order to enact self-governing subjects. In other words, it allows us to show the mutually constitutive nature of problems, domains of knowledge, and subjectivities enacted through governing practices. In order to demonstrate this, we present attempts to govern academic writing with a specific focus on the algorithmic action of Turnitin

Network meta-analysis: science or alchemy? - What works best in generalized anxiety disorder

Recently Papola et al. (2023) recently published a network meta-analysis (NMA) on psychotherapy of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and concluded that cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) should be considered the first-line treatment for GAD. However, there are several concerns with regard to the procedures and the conclusions of this NMA and of NMA in general. We show that these concerns question the conclusions by Papola et al. Furthermore, we place concerns about this NMA in a broader context and question whether existing evidence is consistent with the notion that one form of psychotherapy can be regarded as the gold standard for mental disorders and for all patients and therapist

Empirically supported psychodynamic psychotherapy for common mental disorders – an update applying revised criteria: systematic review protocol

The approach of evidence-based medicine has been extended to psychotherapy. More than twenty years ago, criteria for empirically supported psychotherapeutic treatments (EST) were defined. Meanwhile a new model for empirically supported psychotherapeutic treatments has been proposed. While the empirical status of psychodynamic therapy (PDT) was assessed in several reviews using the previous criteria, the proposed new model has not yet been applied to PDT. For this reason, we will carry out a systematic review on studies of PDT in common mental disorders applying the revised criteria of ESTs. As suggested by the new model we will focus on recent systematic quantitative reviews. A systematic search for meta-analyses on the efficacy of PDT in common mental disorders will be carried out. Meta-analyses will be selected and evaluated by at least two raters along the criteria of the new proposed model. In addition, systematic reviews and individual studies addressing mechanisms of change in PDT, effectiveness under real-world conditions, cost-effectiveness and adverse events will be systematically searched for and evaluated. Finally, quality of evidence, the extent to which benefits exceed harms and strength of recommendations will be assessed per disorder using GRADE

The status of psychodynamic psychotherapy as an empirically supported treatment for common mental disorders – an umbrella review based on updated criteria

To assess the current status of psychodynamic therapy (PDT) as an empirically supported treatment (EST), we carried out a pre-registered systematic umbrella review addressing the evidence for PDT in common mental disorders in adults, based on an updated model for ESTs. Following this model, we focused on meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the past two years to assess efficacy. In addition, we reviewed the evidence on effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and mechanisms of change. Meta-analyses were evaluated by at least two raters using the proposed updated criteria, i.e. effect sizes, risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision, publication bias, treatment fidelity, and their quality as well as that of primary studies. To assess the quality of evidence we applied the GRADE system. A systematic search identified recent meta-analyses on the efficacy of PDT in depressive, anxiety, personality and somatic symptom disorders. High quality evidence in depressive and somatic symptom disorders and moderate quality evidence in anxiety and personality disorders showed that PDT is superior to (inactive and active) control conditions in reducing target symptoms with clinically meaningful effect sizes. Moderate quality evidence suggests that PDT is as efficacious as other active therapies in these disorders. The benefits of PDT outweigh its costs and harms. Furthermore, evidence was found for long-term effects, improving functioning, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and mechanisms of change in the aforementioned disorders. Some limitations in specific research areas exist, such as risk of bias and imprecision, which are, however, comparable to those of other evidence-based psychotherapies. Thus, according to the updated EST model, PDT proved to be an empirically-supported treatment for common mental disorders. Of the three options for recommendation provided by the updated model (i.e., “very strong”, “strong” or “weak”), the new EST criteria suggest that a strong recommendation for treating the aforementioned mental disorders with PDT is the most appropriate option. In conclusion, PDT represents an evidence-based psychotherapy. This is clinically important since no single therapeutic approach fits all psychiatric patients, as shown by the limited success rates across all evidence-based treatments

Borderline personality disorder – a comprehensive review of diagnosis and clinical presentation, etiology, management, and current controversies

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) was introduced in the DSM-III in 1980. From the DSM-III to the DSM-5, no major changes have occurred in its defining criteria. The disorder is characterized by instability of self-image, interpersonal relationships and affects. Further symptoms include impulsivity, intense anger, feelings of emptiness, strong abandonment fears, suicidal or self-mutilation behavior, and transient stress-related paranoid ideation or severe dissociative symptoms. There is evidence that BPD can be reliably diagnosed and differentiated from other mental disorders by semi-structured interviews. The disorder is associated with considerable functional impairment, intensive treatment utilization, and high societal costs. The risk of self-mutilation and suicide is high. In the general adult population, the lifetime prevalence of BPD has been reported to be from 0.7 to 2.7%, while its prevalence is about 10% in outpatient and 20% in inpatient psychiatric services. BPD is significantly associated with other mental disorders, including depressive disorders, substance use disorders, post-traumatic stress disorder, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, bipolar disorder, bulimia nervosa, and other personality disorders. There is convincing evidence to suggest that the interaction between genetic factors and adverse childhood experiences plays a central role in the etiology of BPD. In spite of considerable research, the neurobiological underpinnings of the disorder remain to be clarified. Psychotherapy is the treatment of choice for BPD. Various techniques have been validated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), including dialectical behavior therapy, mentalization-based therapy, transference-focused therapy, and schema therapy. No technique has proved to be superior to others. Compared to treatment as usual, psychotherapy has proved to be more efficacious, with effect sizes between 0.50 and 0.65 with regard to core BPD symptom severity. However, almost half of the patients do not respond sufficiently to psychotherapy, and further research in this area is warranted. It is not clear whether some patients may benefit more from one psychotherapeutic technique than from others. No evidence is available consistently showing that any psychoactive medication is efficacious for the core features of BPD. For discrete and severe comorbid anxiety or depressive symptoms or psychotic-like features, pharmacotherapy may be useful. Early diagnosis and treatment of BPD can reduce individual suffering and societal costs. However, more high-quality studies are required, in both adolescents and adults. This review provides a comprehensive update of the BPD diagnosis and clinical characterization, risk factors, neurobiology, cognition, and management. It also discusses the current controversies concerning the disorder, and highlights the areas in which further research is needed