Psychotherapy for Depression Across Different Age Groups | Adolescent Medicine | JN Learning | AMA Ed Hub [Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]

Psychotherapy for Depression Across Different Age Groups: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Educational Objective
To compare the effects of psychotherapies for depression between different age groups.
1 Credit CME
Key Points

Question  Do psychotherapies for depression have comparable outcomes in age groups across the life span?

Findings  In a meta-analysis of 366 randomized clinical trials including 36 072 patients comparing psychotherapy with control conditions, psychotherapies had lower effect sizes in children and adolescents compared with adults, and no significant differences were found between middle-aged and older adults. However, conclusions are not definitive, given the low quality of many studies, the risk of publication bias, and the high heterogeneity among the studies.

Meaning  There is a need to improve psychotherapies in children and adolescents.

Abstract

Importance  It is not clear whether psychotherapies for depression have comparable effects across the life span. Finding out is important from a clinical and scientific perspective.

Objective  To compare the effects of psychotherapies for depression between different age groups.

Data Sources  Four major bibliographic databases (PubMed, PsychINFO, Embase, and Cochrane) were searched for trials comparing psychotherapy with control conditions up to January 2019.

Study Selection  Randomized trials comparing psychotherapies for depression with control conditions in all age groups were included.

Data Extraction and Synthesis  Effect sizes (Hedges g) were calculated for all comparisons and pooled with random-effects models. Differences in effects between age groups were examined with mixed-effects subgroup analyses and in meta-regression analyses.

Main Outcomes and Measures  Depressive symptoms were the primary outcome.

Results  After removing duplicates, 16 756 records were screened and 2608 full-text articles were screened. Of these, 366 trials (36 702 patients) with 453 comparisons between a therapy and a control condition were included in the qualitative analysis, including 13 (3.6%) in children (13 years and younger), 24 (6.6%) in adolescents (≥13 to 18 years), 19 (5.2%) in young adults (≥18 to 24 years), 242 (66.1%) in middle-aged adults (≥24 to 55 years), 58 (15.8%) in older adults (≥55 to 75 years), and 10 (2.7%) in older old adults (75 years and older). The overall effect size of all comparisons across all age groups was g = 0.75 (95% CI, 0.67-0.82), with very high heterogeneity (I2 = 80%; 95% CI: 78-82). Mean effect sizes for depressive symptoms in children (g = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.15-0.55) and adolescents (g = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.34-0.75) were significantly lower than those in middle-aged adults (g = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.67-0.87). The effect sizes in young adults (g = 0.98; 95% CI, 0.79-1.16) were significantly larger than those in middle-aged adults. No significant difference was found between older adults (g = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.51-0.82) and those in older old adults (g = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.42-1.52). The outcomes should be considered with caution because of the suboptimal quality of most of the studies and the high levels of heterogeneity. However, most primary findings proved robust across sensitivity analyses, addressing risk of bias, target populations included, type of therapy, diagnosis of mood disorder, and method of data analysis.

Conclusions and Relevance  Trials included in this meta-analysis reported effect sizes of psychotherapies that were smaller in children than in adults, probably also smaller in adolescents, that the effects may be somewhat larger in young adults, and without meaningful differences between middle-aged adults, older adults, and older old adults.

Sign in to take quiz and track your certificates

Buy This Activity

JN Learning™ is the home for CME and MOC from the JAMA Network. Search by specialty or US state and earn AMA PRA Category 1 CME Credit™ from articles, audio, Clinical Challenges and more. Learn more about CME/MOC

Article Information

Corresponding Author: Pim Cuijpers, PhD, Department of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7-9, Amsterdam, Noord-Holland 1081 BT, the Netherlands (p.cuijpers@vu.nl).

Accepted for Publication: January 16, 2020.

Published Online: March 18, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2020.0164

Author Contributions: Dr Cuijpers had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Concept and design: Cuijpers, Eckshtain, Quero Castellano, Weisz.

Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Cuijpers, Karyotaki, Eckshtain, Ng, Corteselli, Noma, Weisz.

Drafting of the manuscript: Cuijpers, Eckshtain, Weisz.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Karyotaki, Eckshtain, Ng, Corteselli, Noma, Quero Castellano, Weisz.

Statistical analysis: Cuijpers, Karyotaki, Noma.

Administrative, technical, or material support: Eckshtain, Corteselli, Weisz.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Noma reported personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, and ASKA Pharmaceutical outside of the submitted work. Dr Cuijpers received expense allowances for his membership of the Board of Directions of “Mind.nl,” for being Chair of the Research committee of the Dutch Council for military care and research, and for being Chair of the Mental Health Priority Area of the Wellcome Trust in London, England, in 2018. In addition, he received royalties for books he has authored or coauthored and for occasional workshops and invited addresses. Dr Weisz received payments for consulting with the Child Health and Development Institute and the National Institute of Mental Health, royalties for books he has authored and coauthored, and honoraria for workshops and invited presentations at professional meetings and conferences. No other disclosures were reported.

References
1.
Eckshtain  D , Kuppens  S , Ugueto  A ,  et al.  Meta-analysis: 13-year follow-up of psychotherapy effects on youth depression.   J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2020;59(1):45-63. doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2019.04.002PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Weisz  JR , McCarty  CA , Valeri  SM .  Effects of psychotherapy for depression in children and adolescents: a meta-analysis.   Psychol Bull. 2006;132(1):132-149. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.1.132PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Zhou  X , Hetrick  SE , Cuijpers  P ,  et al.  Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for depression in children and adolescents: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.   World Psychiatry. 2015;14(2):207-222. doi:10.1002/wps.20217PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Cuijpers  P , Cristea  IA , Ebert  DD ,  et al.  Psychological treatment of depression in college students: a meta-analysis.   Depress Anxiety. 2016;33(5):400-414. doi:10.1002/da.22461PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Cuijpers  P , Karyotaki  E , Reijnders  M , Huibers  MJH .  Who benefits from psychotherapies for adult depression? a meta-analytic update of the evidence.   Cogn Behav Ther. 2018;47(2):91-106. doi:10.1080/16506073.2017.1420098PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Zhang  A , Franklin  C , Jing  S ,  et al.  The effectiveness of four empirically supported psychotherapies for primary care depression and anxiety: a systematic review and meta-analysis.   J Affect Disord. 2019;245:1168-1186. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2018.12.008PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
van Bronswijk  S , Moopen  N , Beijers  L , Ruhe  HG , Peeters  F .  Effectiveness of psychotherapy for treatment-resistant depression: a meta-analysis and meta-regression.   Psychol Med. 2019;49(3):366-379. doi:10.1017/S003329171800199XPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Cuijpers  P , Karyotaki  E , de Wit  L , Ebert  DD .  The effects of fifteen evidence-supported therapies for adult depression: a meta-analytic review.   Psychother Res. 2019;1-15. doi:10.1080/10503307.2019.1649732PubMedGoogle Scholar
9.
Kirkham  JG , Choi  N , Seitz  DP .  Meta-analysis of problem solving therapy for the treatment of major depressive disorder in older adults.   Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2016;31(5):526-535. doi:10.1002/gps.4358PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Jonsson  U , Bertilsson  G , Allard  P ,  et al.  Psychological treatment of depression in people aged 65 years and over: a systematic review of efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness.   PLoS One. 2016;11(8):e0160859. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0160859PubMedGoogle Scholar
11.
Cuijpers  P , Karyotaki  E , Pot  AM , Park  M , Reynolds  CF  III .  Managing depression in older age: psychological interventions.   Maturitas. 2014;79(2):160-169. doi:10.1016/j.maturitas.2014.05.027PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Orgeta  V , Brede  J , Livingston  G .  Behavioural activation for depression in older people: systematic review and meta-analysis.   Br J Psychiatry. 2017;211(5):274-279. doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.117.205021PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Cuijpers  P , van Straten  A , Smit  F , Andersson  G .  Is psychotherapy for depression equally effective in younger and older adults? a meta-regression analysis.   Int Psychogeriatr. 2009;21(1):16-24. doi:10.1017/S1041610208008089PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
Weisz  JR , Kuppens  S , Ng  MY ,  et al.  What five decades of research tells us about the effects of youth psychological therapy: a multilevel meta-analysis and implications for science and practice.   Am Psychol. 2017;72(2):79-117. doi:10.1037/a0040360PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Weisz  JR , Kuppens  S , Ng  MY ,  et al.  Are psychotherapies for young people growing stronger? tracking trends over time for youth anxiety, depression, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and conduct problems.   Perspect Psychol Sci. 2019;14:216-237. doi:10.1177/1745691618805436PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
16.
Cuijpers  P , Noma  H , Karyotaki  E , Cipriani  A , Furukawa  T .  Individual, group, telephone, self-help and internet-based cognitive behavior therapy for adult depression: a network meta-analysis.   JAMA Psychiatry. 2019;76:700-707. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.0268PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
17.
Cuijpers  P , Karyotaki  E , Ciharova  M. A meta-analytic database of randomized trials on psychotherapies for depression 2019. osf.io/825c6. Accessed February 5, 2020.
18.
Jobst  A , Brakemeier  EL , Buchheim  A ,  et al.  European Psychiatric Association Guidance on psychotherapy in chronic depression across Europe.   Eur Psychiatry. 2016;33:18-36. doi:10.1016/j.eurpsy.2015.12.003PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
Higgins  JPT , Altman  DG , Gøtzsche  PC ,  et al; Cochrane Bias Methods Group; Cochrane Statistical Methods Group.  The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials.   BMJ. 2011;343:d5928. doi:10.1136/bmj.d5928PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
Cuijpers  P , Li  J , Hofmann  SG , Andersson  G .  Self-reported versus clinician-rated symptoms of depression as outcome measures in psychotherapy research on depression: a meta-analysis.   Clin Psychol Rev. 2010;30(6):768-778. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2010.06.001PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
21.
Hedges  LV , Olkin  I .  Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis. Academic Press; 1985.
22.
Borenstein  M , Hedges  LV , Higgins  JPT , Rothstein  HR .  Introduction to Meta-Analysis. Wiley; 2009. doi:10.1002/9780470743386
23.
Borenstein  M , Higgins  JPT , Hedges  LV , Rothstein  HR .  Basics of meta-analysis: I2 is not an absolute measure of heterogeneity.   Res Synth Methods. 2017;8(1):5-18. doi:10.1002/jrsm.1230PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
24.
Egger  M , Davey Smith  G , Schneider  M , Minder  C .  Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test.   BMJ. 1997;315(7109):629-634. doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
25.
Duval  S , Tweedie  R .  Trim and fill: a simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis.   Biometrics. 2000;56(2):455-463. doi:10.1111/j.0006-341X.2000.00455.xPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
26.
Pastor  DA , Lazowski  RA .  On the multilevel nature of meta-analysis: a tutorial, comparison of software programs, and discussion of analytic choices.   Multivariate Behav Res. 2018;53(1):74-89. doi:10.1080/00273171.2017.1365684PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
If you are not a JN Learning subscriber, you can either:
Subscribe to JN Learning for one year
Buy this activity
jn-learning_Modal_Multimedia_LoginSubscribe_Purchase
Close
If you are not a JN Learning subscriber, you can either:
Subscribe to JN Learning for one year
Buy this activity
jn-learning_Modal_Multimedia_LoginSubscribe_Purchase
Close
With a personal account, you can:
  • Access free activities and track your credits
  • Personalize content alerts
  • Customize your interests
  • Fully personalize your learning experience
Education Center Collection Sign In Modal Right
Close

Name Your Search

Save Search
Close
With a personal account, you can:
  • Track your credits
  • Personalize content alerts
  • Customize your interests
  • Fully personalize your learning experience
jn-learning_Modal_SaveSearch_NoAccess_Purchase
Close

Lookup An Activity

or

Close

My Saved Searches

You currently have no searches saved.

Close
With a personal account, you can:
  • Access free activities and track your credits
  • Personalize content alerts
  • Customize your interests
  • Fully personalize your learning experience
Education Center Collection Sign In Modal Right
Close