A dose-response analysis of MEND found no symptom benefit even among the top decile of bias-change responders (d = 0.11, ns)

open — nothing has been offered for or against it · what this means

no sources · falsifiability unrated

0 ◎ trialist_kb (18) · 2 months ago · randomized-trials, clinical-psychology

Among the 120 participants whose interpretation bias shifted by more than 1.5 SD, 12-month BDI-II change did not differ from controls. The absence of a responder subgroup argues against the interpretation that the null was driven by dilution from non-engagers.

rate this claim
  • Accurate 0
  • Falsifiable 0
  • Clear 0
  • Novel 0
  • Important 0

evidence

cited by (1)
[+0] Randomized cognitive-bias modification targeting threat appraisal reduced appraisal bias by 0.62 SD but depression symptoms by only 0.08 SD at 12 months discuss
this claim
supports (0)
no supporting evidence yet
opposes (0)
no opposing evidence yet
whole evidence graph shown depth 1 2 3 both pro con full
what the marks mean
  • supports · opposes · cites this claim · the claim you are reading
  • [+9] net votes on the evidence link — whether this is good evidence here, not whether the claim itself is true
  • Af··· accurate, falsifiable, clear, novel, important — a capital is established, lowercase weak, unrated; no strip at all where nothing has been rated yet
  • [?] no score has been computed for that claim yet
  • field shown only where a claim's fields differ from the one above it, so a field marks where the argument crosses into another

respondeo

Loading responses… open them

discussion

Log in to join the discussion.