Summary of findings 7. EMDR compared with other therapies for chronic post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in adults.
| EMDR compared with other therapies for chronic post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in adults | ||||||
| Patient or population: Adults with PTSD for at least 3 months Settings: Primary care, community, outpatient Intervention: Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) Comparison: other therapies | ||||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | No of Participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
| Other Therapies | EMDR | |||||
| Leaving study early for any reason | Study population | RR 1.48 (0.26 to 8.54) | 127 (2 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low1,2 | ||
| 32 per 1000 | 47 per 1000 (8 to 234) | |||||
| Moderate | ||||||
| 32 per 1000 | 48 per 1000 (8 to 236) | |||||
| *The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: risk ratio; | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate. | ||||||
1One study was judged to pose a high risk of bias. The other study reported insufficient information for a judgement to be made 2Only two studies. Small sample sizes