Skip to main content
. 2014 Jul 15;88(1):71–86. doi: 10.1111/papt.12036

Table 3.

Longitudinal outcomes: Psychodynamic programme versus MBT

Linear mixed model estimates

Baseline (0 months) Monthly change-rate Three-year effect size
M (SE) M (SE)
Symptom distress: BSI
 Psychodynamic program 1.9 (0.04) −0.01 (0.002) 0.88
 MBT 2.1 (0.1) −0.03 (0.005) 1.79
 Difference (psychodynamic program – MBT) ns 0.015 (0.004)**
Interpersonal problems: CIP
 Psychodynamic program 1.8 (0.03) −0.01 (0.001) 0.91
 MBT 1.7 (0.08) −0.02 (0.002) 1.41
 Difference (psychodynamic program – MBT) ns 0.07 (0.003)**
CIP subscale: Mistrust
 Psychodynamic program 2.42 (0.06) −0.016 (0.002) 0.67
 MBT 2.55 (0.15) −0.03 (0.006) 1.46
 Difference (psychodynamic program – MBT) ns 0.01 (0.004)*
Psychosocial functioning: GAF
 Psychodynamic program 46 (0.3) 0.24 (0.02) 2.97
 MBT 48 (0.7) 0.49 (0.09) 4.60
 Difference (psychodynamic program – MBT) ns −0.21 (0.05)**

Note.The table demonstrates mixed model estimations of longitudinal (linear) change and corresponding estimated effect sizes for patients in MBT and in the former psychodynamic treatment program.

MBT = mentalization-based treatment; M = mean; SE = standard error; BSI = Brief Symptom Inventory; CIP = Circumplex of Interpersonal Problems; GAF = global assessment of functioning.

** and *indicates statistically significant at p < .01 and p < .05, respectively. Not significant differences (p > .05) are indicated by ns.