Corrigendum to “The relative efficacy of bona fide psychotherapies for treating post-traumatic stress disorder: A meta-analysis of direct comparisons”

Description

In the course of extending our meta-analysis of the relative efficacy of psychotherapy treatment of PTSD (Benish, Imel, & Wampold, 2008), we detected three errors in the original analysis that appear in Table 1. The effect size for all measures should be d=.40 for Foa et al. (1999), while all measures and PTSD measures for Devilly & Spence (1999) should be d=.43 and d=.57, respectively. In the original analysis, data from Resick et al. (1988) was erroneously included in lieu of Resick (2002) including the quotation. The correct effect size for Resick et al. (2002) all measures and PTSD measures should be d=.31 and d=.27, respectively. After correcting these errors, the upper bound of the aggregated effect increases slightly to 0.19 and 0.22 for all measures and PTSD measures, respectively. These errors did not affect the significance level of any test of the hypotheses of the study.

Format

Journal

Language

English

Author(s)

Steven G. Benish
Zac E. Imel
Bruce E. Wampold

Original Work Citation

Benish, S. G., Imel, Z. E., & Wampold, B. E. (2008, October). Corrigendum to ?The relative efficacy of bona fide psychotherapies for treating post-traumatic stress disorder: A meta-analysis of direct comparisons? Clinical Psychology Review, 28(7), 1281. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2008.06.001

Collection

Citation

“Corrigendum to “The relative efficacy of bona fide psychotherapies for treating post-traumatic stress disorder: A meta-analysis of direct comparisons”,” Francine Shapiro Library, accessed October 22, 2020, https://emdria.omeka.net/items/show/21165.

Output Formats