Table 2.
Prioritized research goals (from 1 = very unimportant to 6 = very important; patients’ ranges were 1 ‐ 6 for all items)
| Goals from meta‐review | Patients | Professionals | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
M (SD) Rank |
(very) important Rank |
n |
M (SD); range Rank |
(very) important Rank |
n | |
|
Which factors influence the long‐term effectiveness of PT? (goal #7) |
5.3 (1.2) 1 |
78% 1 |
59 |
5.7 (0.5); 5‐6 1 |
100% 1 |
8 |
|
How effective are PT approaches in comparison (eg CBT vs. psychodynamic vs. client‐centred)? (goal #1) |
5.0 (1.3) 2 |
71% 2 |
63 |
4.5 (2); 1‐6 9 |
63% 4 |
8 |
|
How to disseminate effective treatments into practice? (goal #9) |
5.0 (1.3) 2 |
71% 2 |
60 |
5.3 (0.8); 4‐6 4 |
75% 3 |
7 |
|
How do different characteristics influence the efficacy of PT (eg duration, frequency, role of therapist)? (goal #2) |
4.9 (1.3) 3 |
65% 5 |
63 |
5.0 (1.2); 3‐6 7 |
63% 4 |
8 |
|
By which means is PT effective (therapy mechanisms, eg habituation)? (goal #6) |
4.8 (1.3) 4 |
70% 3 |
62 |
5.4 (0.5); 5‐6 2 |
100% 1 |
8 |
|
How effective is PT including relatives (family, friends)? (goal #10) |
4.7 (1.4) 5 |
60% 6 |
62 |
5.4 (0.7); 4‐6 3 |
88% 2 |
8 |
|
How does PT impact on patients’ quality of life? (goal #3) |
4.7 (1.4) 5 |
67% 4 |
63 |
4.7 (1.0); 3‐6 8 |
63% 4 |
8 |
|
How to motivate patients for confrontation therapy? (goal #8) |
4.6 (1.5) 6 |
57% 7 |
62 |
5.3 (1.2); 3‐6 5 |
75% 3 |
8 |
|
How effective is online PT (eg Internet‐based CBT supported by a therapist)? (goal #4) |
4.0 (1.7) 7 |
44% 8 |
61 |
5.0 (0.8); 4‐6 6 |
75% 3 |
8 |
|
How effective is PT delivered in groups vs. individually? (goal #5) |
3.7 (1.4) 8 |
30% 9 |
63 |
4.1 (1.3); 2‐6 10 |
38% 5 |
8 |
Abbreviations: CBT, cognitive‐behavioural therapy; PT, psychotherapy. Ranks are prinited in bold.