↓ Skip to main content

Optimizing psychotherapy dosage for comorbid depression and personality disorders (PsyDos): a pragmatic randomized factorial trial using schema therapy and short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
140 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
Optimizing psychotherapy dosage for comorbid depression and personality disorders (PsyDos): a pragmatic randomized factorial trial using schema therapy and short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12888-018-1829-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marit Kool, Henricus L. Van, Anna Bartak, Saskia C. M. de Maat, Arnoud Arntz, Johanna W. van den Eshof, Jaap Peen, Matthijs Blankers, Judith E. Bosmans, Jack J. M. Dekker

Abstract

Patients with comorbid depression and personality disorders suffer from a heavy disease burden while tailored treatment options are limited, accounting for a high psychological and economic burden. Little is known about the effect of treatment dosage and type of psychotherapy for this specific co-morbid patient population, in terms of treatment-effect and cost-effectiveness. This study aims to compare treatment outcome of 25 versus 50 individual therapy sessions in a year. We expect the 50-session condition to be more effective in treating depression and maintaining the effect. Secondary objectives will be addressed in order to find therapy-specific and non-specific mechanisms of change. In a mono-center pragmatic randomized controlled trial with a 2 × 2 factorial design, 200 patients with a depressive disorder and personality disorder(s) will be included. Patients will be recruited from a Dutch mental health care institute for personality disorders. They will be randomized over therapy dosage (25 vs 50 sessions in a year) and type of therapy (schema therapy vs short-term psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy). The primary clinical outcome measure will be depression severity and remission. Changes in personality functioning and quality of life will be investigated as secondary outcomes. A priori postulated effect moderators and mediators will be collected as well. All patients are assessed at baseline and at 1, 2, 3, 6, 9-12 months (end of therapy) and at follow up (6 and 12 months after end of treatment). Alongside the trial, an economic evaluation will be conducted. Costs will be collected from a societal perspective. This trial will be the first to compare two psychotherapy dosages in patients with both depression and personality disorders. Insight in the effect of treatment dosage for this patient group will contribute to both higher treatment effectiveness and lower costs. In addition, this study will contribute to the limited evidence base on treating patients with both depression and personality disorders. Understanding the processes that account for the therapeutic changes could help to gain insight in what works for whom. This trial has been registered on July 20th 2016, Netherlands Trial Register, part of the Dutch Cochrane Centre ( NTR5941 ).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 140 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 16%
Student > Master 14 10%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 8%
Student > Postgraduate 7 5%
Other 16 11%
Unknown 57 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 44 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 6%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 60 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 09 August 2018.
All research outputs
#4,048,402
of 23,099,576 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#1,525
of 4,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,037
of 330,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#50
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,099,576 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,772 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 330,798 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.