We searched PubMed using the following search strategy: (“autogenic training”[MeSH Terms] OR (“autogenic”[All Fields] AND “training”[All Fields]) OR “autogenic training”[All Fields]) OR (“behaviour therapy”[All Fields] OR “behavior therapy”[MeSH Terms] OR (“behavior”[All Fields] AND “therapy”[All Fields]) OR “behavior therapy”[All Fields]) OR (“cognitive therapy”[MeSH Terms] OR (“cognitive”[All Fields] AND “therapy”[All Fields]) OR “cognitive therapy”[All Fields]) OR “biofeedback
Personal ViewControl conditions for randomised trials of behavioural interventions in psychiatry: a decision framework
Introduction
At the core of modern medicine is the notion that all interventions used in clinical practice should be based on a high standard of evidence, a principle often referred to as evidence-based medicine. However, behavioural interventions used in psychiatry do not always have the necessary evidence base.1 Moreover, even if attempted, the implementation of evidence-based medicine standards for behavioural interventions faces specific challenges that are not easily overcome.2 The gold standard for evidence in medicine is generally judged to be the double-blind randomised controlled trial (RCT). Compared with drug trials, the double-blind, placebo-controlled design is not as easily applied to psychotherapy and other behavioural treatment strategies, particularly when it comes to control group design. In this Personal View, we propose a decision framework for the choice of control condition for such trials, taking into consideration the type of intervention, patient population, available resources, purpose of the trial, and trial phase.
Section snippets
Control conditions in RCTs assessing behavioural interventions
The control arm is an essential part of a RCT, intended to account for threats to internal validity resulting from the natural course of the disorder, response biases, and regression to the mean, among others. Several control conditions have been used in trials of behavioural interventions, including no treatment, minimal treatment, treatment as usual (TAU), and waitlist.3 For the purpose of this Personal View, we use definitions of control conditions modified from Mohr and colleagues (panel 1).
Decision framework
The selection of a control condition in a trial for a behavioural intervention will depend on several factors including the disease and its characteristics, the development phase, the purpose of the study, and the resources available. Thus, the choice of comparison condition is always a trade-off between the interests of the participating patients (eg, to have a high probability of receiving an effective intervention), the researchers performing the trial (eg, to protect participants from harm,
Conclusion and outlook
In this Personal View, we aimed to translate previous recommendations for trial design in psychotherapy research3 into a process of control group choice and justification. We derive from these considerations and recommendations the notion of participation risk and integrate this into a decision framework that includes consideration of trial stage and resource availability. Increasing awareness of the effect of control group choice in trials of behavioural interventions will hopefully help to
Search strategy and selection criteria
References (33)
- et al.
The use of waitlists as control conditions in anxiety disorders research
J Psychiatr Res
(2016) - et al.
Placebo effects in psychiatry: mediators and moderators
Lancet Psychiatry
(2015) - et al.
Can effects of antidepressants in patients with mild depression be considered as clinically significant?
J Affect Disord
(2012) - et al.
Design makes a difference: a meta-analysis of antidepressant response rates in placebo-controlled versus comparator trials in late-life depression
Am J Geriatr Psychiatry
(2008) - et al.
Contribution of spontaneous improvement to placebo response in depression: a meta-analytic review
J Psychiatr Res
(2012) - et al.
The effect of treatment as usual on major depressive disorder: a meta-analysis
J Affect Disord
(2017) - et al.
What are we doing to waiting list controls?
Behav Res Ther
(2002) - et al.
Do we underestimate the benefits of antidepressants?
Lancet
(2014) - et al.
The effects of blinding on the outcomes of psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy for adult depression: a meta-analysis
Eur Psychiatry
(2015) A level playing field
Lancet Psychiatry
(2014)
Signal to noise: the trouble with psychiatry trials
Lancet Psychiatry
The selection and design of control conditions for randomized controlled trials of psychological interventions
Psychother Psychosom
Control condition design and implementation features in controlled trials: a meta-analysis of trials evaluating psychotherapy for depression
Transl Behav Med
Guided self-help interventions for irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol
Rethinking pragmatic randomised controlled trials: introducing the ‘cohort multiple randomised controlled trial’ design
BMJ
Waiting list may be a nocebo condition in psychotherapy trials: a contribution from network meta-analysis
Acta Psychiatr Scand
Cited by (133)
Strategies to improve the quality and usefulness of mental health trials in humanitarian settings
2023, The Lancet PsychiatryPhase-based psychological interventions for complex post-traumatic stress disorder: A systematic review
2023, Journal of Affective Disorders ReportsEvaluation of the Early Adolescent Skills for Eemotions (EASE) intervention in Lebanon: A randomized controlled trial
2023, Comprehensive PsychiatryReactions to being allocated to a waiting list control group in a digital alcohol intervention trial
2023, Patient Education and Counseling