Monson 2006.
| Methods | Randomised controlled trial | |
| Participants | 60 DSM‐IV‐TR PTSD. Combat veterans (54 men, 6 women) in the USA | |
| Interventions | 12 sessions of cognitive processing therapy conducted twice weekly when possible (n = 30) vs waitlist (n = 30) | |
| Outcomes | CAPS, PCL, BDI, STAI | |
| Notes | Experienced therapists delivered therapy and treatment adherence was assessed | |
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Quote "Eligible participants were randomised to receive the treatment immediately or to wait for 10 weeks to receive the treatment (10 weeks was equivalent to the ideal 6 weeks of twice weekly sessions and the 1‐month follow‐up period for those in the CPT condition). The study biostatistician provided the participants’ condition assignment to the study coordinator." Comment: The method of random sequence generation was not reported. |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote "Eligible participants were randomised to receive the treatment immediately or to wait for 10 weeks to receive the treatment (10 weeks was equivalent to the ideal 6 weeks of twice weekly sessions and the 1‐month follow‐up period for those in the CPT condition). The study biostatistician provided the participants’ condition assignment to the study coordinator." |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Quote "Primary analyses were performed according to the intention‐to‐treat principle; data from all participants were used regardless of their treatment completion." Comment: 6 participants dropped out from the treatment group. 4 participants dropped out from the waitlist group. |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | Comment: All specified outcomes were reported. |
| Other bias | Low risk | Comment: There were no other obvious sources of bias. |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | Comment: Participants were aware of their allocation. |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Quote "The independent clinician assessors were blinded to condition assignment and participants were instructed to not disclose their condition assignment to them." |