Table 28GRADE profile – CCBT versus attention control for specific phobias

Quality assessmentNo. of participantsEffectQuality
No. of studiesDesignRisk of biasInconsistencyIndirectnessImprecisionOther considerationCCBTAttention controlRelative (95% CI)Absolute
1Randomised trialsSerious1No serious inconsistencyNo serious indirectnessSerious2Reporting bias35/13 (38.5%)4/12 (33.3%)RR 1.15 (0.4 to 3.31)50 more per 1000 (from 200 fewer to 770 more)⊕○○○
VERY LOW
33.3%50 more per 1000 (from 200 fewer to 769 more)
3Randomised trialsSerious1No serious inconsistencyNo serious indirectnessSerious2Reporting bias36145–SMD 0.58 lower (0.94 to 0.21 lower)⊕○○○
VERY LOW
1Randomised trialsSerious1No serious inconsistencyNo serious indirectnessSerious2Reporting bias31312–SMD 0.83 lower (1.65 lower to 0 higher)⊕○○○
VERY LOW
1Randomised trialsSerious1No serious inconsistencyNo serious indirectnessSerious2Reporting bias32624–SMD 0.21 lower (0.77 lower to 0.35 higher)⊕○○○
VERY LOW

From: 8, COMPUTERISED COGNITIVE BEHAVIOURAL THERAPY FOR SPECIFIC PHOBIAS IN ADULTS

Cover of Social Anxiety Disorder
Social Anxiety Disorder: Recognition, Assessment and Treatment.
NICE Clinical Guidelines, No. 159.
National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health (UK).
Leicester (UK): British Psychological Society (UK); 2013.
Copyright © The British Psychological Society & The Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2013.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Enquiries in this regard should be directed to the British Psychological Society.

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.