Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Efficacy and Effectiveness of the Unified Protocol for Emotional Disorders in Group Format for Adults
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 15440918 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Antonio Ayuso-Bartol (0000-0001-7710-9440, Pontifical University of Salamanca, corresponding author), María Ángeles Gómez Martínez (0000-0003-0095-2194, Pontifical University of Salamanca), María Ángeles Gómez-Martínez, Pablo Riesco-Matías (0000-0003-2731-9372, Pontifical University of Salamanca), Jose Ramón Yela Bernabé (0000-0001-9770-4001, Pontifical University of Salamanca), José Ramón Yela-Bernabé, Antonio Crego (0000-0003-0410-5697, Pontifical University of Salamanca), JOSE BUZ (0000-0002-8526-937X, Universidad de Salamanca) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 23 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 3948-3974 |
| Publication date | 2024-05-17 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1557-1874 • E-ISSN: 1557-1882 |
| Publisher | Springer Science+Business Media (PUBLISHER • DE) |
| DOI | 10.1007/s11469-024-01330-z |
| OpenAlex | W4396995229 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 49 |
Little is known about the efficacy and effectiveness of the Unified Protocol for Emotional Disorders in group format. A systematic review of the research of this intervention (UP) was conducted, and a meta-analysis of the efficacy and effectiveness was made. We searched for studies in the databases Web of Science, PubMed, PsycInfo, PSICODOC, Scholar Google, EBSCOhost, SpringerLink, and Sage Publications. We used a fixed effects model. Effect sizes were measured using Hedges’ g (adjusted), and heterogeneity was calculated using Cochran’s Q and I 2. The psychological variables on which we assessed the effect of the intervention were anxiety and depressive symptoms, positive and negative affect, quality of life, and social adjustment. We located 115 studies that applied the UP, including 7 studies for the efficacy analysis (randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies) and 24 for the effectiveness analysis (RCT and non-RCT studies). The analyses suggest that the UP presents high efficacy reducing anxiety (1.29) and depressive (1.54) symptoms, as well as high effectiveness in decreasing negative affect (0.78), anxiety (1.08), and depressive (1.02) symptoms and increasing quality of life (1.01), social adjustment (0.62), and positive affect (0.59). We found heterogeneity in the analyses performed. This heterogeneity could be explained by the differences between the heterogeneous studies and the rest of the studies. The UP in group format for adults represents a highly effective and efficient alternative for treating emotional problems
Alternative medicine · Health psychology · Meta-analysis · Pathology · Physical therapy · Protocol (science · Psychotherapist · Public health · Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development · Clinical Psychology · Medicine · Mental Health Treatment and Access · Nursing · Personality Disorders and Psychopathology · Psychology · Internal Medicine · Rehabilitation
New Effect Size Rules of Thumb
Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis
Estimating Effect Sizes From Pretest-Posttest-Control Group Designs
Quality of life in the anxiety disorders
Psychotherapy for Military-Related PTSD
Resources for mental health
Transdiagnostic approaches to mental health problems
Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis
Transdiagnostic treatment of emotional disorders in people with multiple sclerosis
Best‐practice recommendations for estimating interaction effects using meta‐analysis
| Highly cited | No |
|---|