[Summary text]
Study design:
Study grouping: Parallel group
Open Label:
Cluster RCT:
Baseline Characteristics
Treatment (combined)
comparison ( fluvoxamine)
Included criteria:
Excluded criteria:
Pretreatment:
Intervention Characteristics
Treatment (combined)
comparison ( fluvoxamine)
YBOCS/CYBOCS score end of treatment
Social funktionsevne længste follow-up
Livskvalitet længste follow-up
Angst efter endt behandling
Depression - efter endt behandling
symptomscore mindst 30% reduktion i CYBOCS/YBOCS
symptomscore min. 30 % reduktion i CYBOCS/YBOCS - længste follow up (min 3 mdr)
remission (CYBOCS/YBOCS < 10)
Sponsorship source:
Country:
Setting:
Comments:
Authors name: Hossein Shareh
Institution:
Email: hsharreh@yahoo.com.au
Address:
Study design: Randomized controlled trial
Study grouping: Parallel group
Open Label:
Cluster RCT:
Baseline Characteristics
Treatment (ACT)
comparison ( PRT)
Included criteria: OCD/DSM+18 yearsno new or change of medication 30 days prior to studyno other therapy during og 30 days before study
Excluded criteria: psychoticorganic disorder
Pretreatment: no difference
Intervention Characteristics
Treatment (ACT)
comparison ( PRT)
YBOCS/CYBOCS score end of treatment
Social funktionsevne længste follow-up
Livskvalitet længste follow-up
Angst efter endt behandling
Depression - efter endt behandling
symptomscore mindst 30% reduktion i CYBOCS/YBOCS
symptomscore min. 30 % reduktion i CYBOCS/YBOCS - længste follow up (min 3 mdr)
remission (CYBOCS/YBOCS < 10)
Sponsorship source:
Country:
Setting:
Comments:
Authors name: Michael P. Twohig
Institution:
Email:
Address:
Birgitte Holm Petersen on 09/09/2015 07:33
Dichotomous Outcomes
a clinical responder is a participant who has a score below 12 on the YBOCSand decreased by at least six points from pretreatment to posttreatment or tofollow-up. It was found that 55.5% of the ACT condition versus 12% of the PRTcondition were treatment responders at posttreatment, a large and statistically significanteffect [2 (1, N=34) = 6.87, p=.009, d = 1.01], and that 62.5% of the ACT group versus26.6% of the PRT group were treatment responders at three-month follow-up, also a largeand significant effect [2 (1, N=31) = 5.14, p=.023, d = .89]. T
Wrong study design
Wrong study design
Wrong study design
Wrong study design
Wrong study design
Selection bias (biased allocation to interventions) due to inadequate generation of a randomised sequence
Selection bias (biased allocation to interventions) due to inadequate concealment of allocations prior to assignment
Performance bias due to knowledge of the allocated interventions by participants and personnel during the study
Detection bias due to knowledge of the allocated interventions by outcome assessors
Attrition bias due to amount, nature or handling of incomplete outcome data
Reporting bias due to selective outcome reporting
Bias due to problems not covered elsewhere in the table
Describe the method used to generate the allocation sequence in sufficient detail to allow an assessment of whether it should produce comparable groups.
-
-
-
Describe the method used to conceal the allocation sequence in sufficient detail to determine wether intervention allocations could have been foreseen in advance of, during, enrolement.
-
-
-
Describe all measures used, if any to blind study participants and personnel from knowledge of which intervention a participant received. Provide any information relating to whether the intended blinding was effective.
Describe all measures used, if any to blind outcome assessors from knowledge of which intervention a participant received. Provide any information relating to whether the intended blinding was effective.
-
Describe the completeness of outcome data for each main outcome, including attrition and exlusions from the analysis. State whether attrition and exclusions were reported, the numbers in each intervention group (compared with total randomized participants), reasons for attrition/exclusions where reported, and any re-inclusions in analyses performed by the review authors.
State how the possibility of selective outcome reporting was examined by the review authors and what was found.
-
-
State any important concerns about bias not addressed in the other domains in the tool. If particular questions/entries were re-specified in the review's protocol, responses should be provided for each question/entry.