Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy and Psychodynamic Psychotherapy: Techniques, Efficacy, and Indications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: In this article, we provide an overview of the techniques and efficacy of the two most commonly used psychotherapeutic treatments of psychiatric disorders in adults: cognitive-behavioral and psychodynamic therapy. Psychotherapeutic techniques, major indications, and empirical evidence will be presented. The focus will be on empirically supported models of treatment. CONTEXT: Cognitive-behavioral therapy and psychodynamic psychotherapy are the most frequently applied methods of psychotherapy in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To give an up-to-date description of cognitive-behavioral therapy and psychodynamic psychotherapy and to review empirical evidence for efficacy in specific mental disorders. DATA SOURCES: Systematic reviews of psychotherapy outcome research based on evidence-based methods were used. In order to identify more recent trials, Medline, Psyclnfo, Pubmed, and Current Contents were searched in addition in July 2005 using database-specific keywords. In October 2005, the search was updated. Text books and journal articles were used as well. STUDY SELECTION: The authors reviewed the available systematic surveys and meta-analyses as well as the additionally identified studies using established inclusion criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Following the evidence-based methods of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, an established hierarchy of study designs was applied. Using rigorous criteria, only evidence from randomized controlled trials (Type 1 studies) was included. The authors independently assessed for which mental disorders randomized controlled trials provide evidence for the efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy or psychodynamic psychotherapy in specific disorders. DATA SYNTHESIS: The efficacy of cognitive-behavioral in many mental disorders has been demonstrated by a substantial number of randomized controlled trials and several meta-analyses. However, for specific disorders the rates of treatment responders are not yet sufficient. For psychodynamic psychotherapy, clearly less efficacy studies are available. However, the available studies provided evidence that psychodynamic psychotherapy is an effective treatment of specific mental disorders as well. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is substantial evidence for the efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy and some evidence for the efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy, further studies are required to improve the positive outcome rates of treatment responders in specific mental disorders. For psychodynamic psychotherapy further studies of specific forms of treatment in specific mental disorders are required to corroborate the available results.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".