Summary of findings 8. Non‐TFCBT compared with Waitlist/Usual Care for chronic post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in adults.
| Non‐TFCBT compared with Waitlist/Usual Care 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: non‐trauma‐focused CBT Comparison: Waitlist/Usual Care | ||||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | No of Participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
| Waitlist/Usual Care | Non‐TFCBT Therapy | |||||
| Severity of PTSD symptoms ‐ Clinician‐rated | The mean severity of PTSD symptoms ‐ clinician in the intervention groups was 1.22 standard deviations lower (1.76 to 0.69 lower) | 106 (4 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low1,2,3 | |||
| Leaving the study early due to any reason | Study population | RR 1.96 (0.70 to 5.48) | 141 (5 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low1,2,3 | ||
| 78 per 1000 | 153 per 1000 (55 to 428) | |||||
| Moderate | ||||||
| 83 per 1000 | 163 per 1000 (58 to 455) | |||||
| *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. | ||||||
1Insufficient data to judge risk of bias 2Unexplained heterogeneity 3Small sample sizes