How science could be tricking us onto the therapist’s couch


Psychotherapy isn’t as effective at treating depression as published clinical trials suggest, and thanks to a bias in scientific publishing, people might not be getting the treatment they need.

According to a new study, the benefits of psychotherapy for treating depression have been inflated because of the tendency to not report negative findings from clinical trials.

The researchers behind the study, from the US and the Netherlands, are joining the call for all clinical trials results – including negative ones – to be reported.

Globally, an estimated 350 million people have depression, making it the leading cause of disability worldwide, according to the World Health Organization.

Depression can be mild to severe, and each case requires a specific treatment approach. Treatment options range from exercise, self-help groups and mindfulness to psychological treatment and antidepressant medicines, and experts are increasingly suggesting a holistic approach to treatment. Despite this, the availability of psychological treatments on the NHS is limited; NHS Choices warns patients of long waiting lists, and even advises private sessions as an alternative.

The new study, published in PLoS ONE, looked at the results of clinical trials investigating psychological treatment in patients diagnosed with major depressive disorder.

Out of 55 US National Institutes of Health grants awarded between 1972 and 2008 to fund these clinical trials, the results of 13 were never published, and two were not started. This, say the researchers, has led to a bias in the published results. One of the study’s authors Dr. Steven Hollon, professor of psychology at Vanderbilt University, explained:

Read on...

It’s like flipping a bunch of coins and only keeping the ones that come up heads.

The team contacted the researchers behind the unpublished studies and analysed their data along with the studies that were published. They found similar results to what they had seen with antidepressant medicines: that the treatment works, but not as well as we thought. Co-author Dr. Erick Turner, associate professor of psychiatry and pharmacology at OHSU School of Medicine, directed a previous study on publication bias in clinical trials on antidepressants. He said:

This study shows that publication bias occurs in psychotherapy, mirroring what we’ve seen previously with antidepressants and other drugs. Journal articles are vetted through the process of peer review, but this process has loopholes, allowing treatment benefits to be overstated and potential harms to be understated. The consumers of this skewed information are health care providers and, ultimately, their patients.

The researchers are calling for funding bodies and journals to publish or archive protocols and raw data from clinical trials – particularly negative results – to correct this publication bias, ultimately ensuring patients get the best possible treatment.

This is the latest in a line of pleas for less bias through fair publication, led by the AllTrials campaign.

Launched in January 2013, the AllTrials campaign “calls for all past and present clinical trials to be registered and their results reported.” The campaign has seen extensive support: so far, 86,563 people and 622 organisations have signed the AllTrials petition.

The new study provides yet more evidence that today’s approach to scientific publishing – selecting positive results and neglecting studies that show treatments are not effective – is having an impact on patients. Although the results show that psychotherapy is still effective, it certainly shows that doctors are basing their treatment strategies on incomplete information. Perhaps this underlines the need to take a wider view of depression treatment instead of relying on one single approach.

Featured image: “Depressed” by Sander van der Wel, via Wikimedia Commons.


We need your help to keep speaking the truth

Every story that you have come to us with; each injustice you have asked us to investigate; every campaign we have fought; each of your unheard voices we amplified; we do this for you. We are making a difference on your behalf.

Our fight is your fight. You’ve supported our collective struggle every time you gave us a like; and every time you shared our work across social media. Now we need you to support us with a monthly donation.

We have published nearly 2,000 articles and over 50 films in 2021. And we want to do this and more in 2022 but we don’t have enough money to go on at this pace. So, if you value our work and want us to continue then please join us and be part of The Canary family.

In return, you get:

* Advert free reading experience
* Quarterly group video call with the Editor-in-Chief
* Behind the scenes monthly e-newsletter
* 20% discount in our shop

Almost all of our spending goes to the people who make The Canary’s content. So your contribution directly supports our writers and enables us to continue to do what we do: speaking truth, powered by you. We have weathered many attempts to shut us down and silence our vital opposition to an increasingly fascist government and right-wing mainstream media.

With your help we can continue:

* Holding political and state power to account
* Advocating for the people the system marginalises
* Being a media outlet that upholds the highest standards
* Campaigning on the issues others won’t
* Putting your lives central to everything we do

We are a drop of truth in an ocean of deceit. But we can’t do this without your support. So please, can you help us continue the fight?

The Canary Support us

Comments are closed