CBT vs TAU

Question 1

Why is comparing CBT to TAU an effective method of analysis?

Answer 1

It highlights the differences in the efficacy between treatments, giving more assurance in the results.

Question 2

Meyer et al. (2012)

Answer 2

When comparing CBT to supportive therapy, CBT offered no additional benefits than other therapies, including no differences in reducing relapse rates. However it was more beneficial than TAU or waiting lists, suggesting that CBT is effective in treating BD but having other treatments alongside it may potentially increase the effectiveness.

Question 3

Why was Meyer et al. (2012) study trustworthy?

Answer 3

Participants were randomly allocated and raters were blinded to the treatment conditions, reducing the possibility of results being affected by bias.

Question 4

Lynch et al. (2009)

Answer 4

Conducted a meta-analysis of studies which compared CBT to TAU and also suggested that CBT did not impact relapse rates.

Question 5

Lynch et al. (2009) - trustworthy?

Answer 5

Included studies with large sample sizes, increasing the generalisability.

Question 6

Chiang et al. (2017)

Answer 6

States that results or meta analyses may be affected by the ‘file drawer’ problem, suggesting that some non-significant findings may not be published and thus, the literature may suggest that CBT is more or less effect than it actually is, reducing the validity.