For what it's worth, their conclusion was consistent with their study
design. In a noninferiority trial, the only conclusions available are
"the new treatment was inferior to the old one" and "the new treatment
was NOT inferior to the old one."
And there's something to be said for having more than one
psychotherapeutic tool in the drawer.
My main criticism is that the study was really underpowered for
drawing conclusions about the absence of differences. That concern is
allayed by the fact that EMDR came out looking superior to CBT on some
measures (and that the authors appropriately refrained from saying
so in the context of a noninferiority study).
--David Epstein
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Ken Steele went:
My first reaction was where is the control group? Both groups are
already undergoing treatment. To quote from the article:
"Design
This study was a non-inferiority, randomized controlled clinical trial
investigating the efficacy of EMDR treatment compared with CBT
intervention in patients with recurrent depressive disorder already
undergoing ?treatment as usual? (TAU)."
The CBT and EMDR were added on top of the TAU. How do we know whether
CBT and EMDR had any added benefit beyond the TAU?
Ken
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kenneth M. Steele, Ph.D. steel...@appstate.edu
Professor
Department of Psychology http://www.psych.appstate.edu
Appalachian State University
Boone, NC 28608
USA
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2/20/2018 9:48 AM, Annette Taylor wrote:
So I read this article and here are their results:
"Sixty-six patients were analyzed as completers (31 EMDR vs. 35 CBT).
No significant difference between the two groups was found either at
the end of the interventions (71% EMDR vs. 48.7% CBT) or at the
6-month follow-up (54.8% EMDR vs. 42.9% CBT). A RM-ANOVA on BDI-II
scores showed similar reductions over time in both groups [/F/(6,59) =
22.501,/p/< 0.001] and a significant interaction effect between time
and group [/F/(6,59) = 3.357,/p/= 0.006], with lower BDI-II scores in
the EMDR group at T1 [mean difference = ?7.309 (95% CI [?12.811,
?1.806]),/p =/0.010]. The RM-ANOVA on secondary outcome measures
showed similar improvement over time in both groups [/F/(14,51) =
8.202,/p/< 0.001], with no significant differences between groups
[/F/(614,51) = 0.642,/p/= 0.817]. "
And I would conclude: well the, USE CBT! It is more efficient and
cheaper and easier to use since you don't have to ADD a useless add-on
to CBT. But NO!!!!!!!!!! here is their conclusion:
"this study suggests that EMDR could be a viable and effective
treatment for reducing depressive symptoms and improving the quality
of life of patients with recurrent depression. Trial registration:
ISRCTN09958202. "
WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? I had a WTF moment here. Sorry if I'm being
dense at 6 am. Since tipsters are smart people perhaps you can
enlighten me.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00074/full?utm_source=F-AAE&utm_medium=EMLF&utm_campaign=MRK_547424_69_Psycho_20180220_arts_A
<https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00074/full?utm_source=F-AAE&utm_medium=EMLF&utm_campaign=MRK_547424_69_Psycho_20180220_arts_A>
Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D.
Professor, Psychological Sciences
University of San Diego
5998 Alcala Park
San Diego, CA 921210
tay...@sandiego.edu <mailto:tay...@sandiego.edu>
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: da...@neverdave.com.
To unsubscribe click here:
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13160.a3a8185b610d2c5e39015f64972c8705&n=T&l=tips&o=52143
or send a blank email to
leave-52143-13160.a3a8185b610d2c5e39015f64972c8...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@mail-archive.com.
To unsubscribe click here:
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=52150
or send a blank email to
leave-52150-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
