Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Interpersonal problems as a predictor of treatment outcome in adult depression: An individual participant data meta-analysis

  • Juan Martin Gomez Penedo*
  • , Manuel Meglio
  • , Christoph Flueckiger
  • , Frederik J. Wienicke
  • , Jasmijn Breunese
  • , Marco Menchetti
  • , Paola Rucci
  • , Robert Johansson
  • , Joel M. Towni
  • , Allan A. Abbassj
  • , Peter Lilliengren
  • , R. Michael Bagby
  • , Lena C. Quilty
  • , Lotte H. J. M. Lemmens
  • , Suzanne C. van Bronswijk
  • , Michael Barkham
  • , William B. Stilesq
  • , Gillian E. Hardy
  • , Peter Fonagy
  • , Patrick Luyten
  • Matthew P. Constantinou, Jacques P. Barberv, Kevin S. Mccarthyw, Nili Solomonovx, Anthony S. Joycey, Pim Cuijpersz, Ellen Driessen
*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Objectives: Interpersonal problems are a fundamental feature of depression, but study-level meta-analyses of their association with treatment outcome have been limited by heterogeneity in primary studies' analyses and reported results. We conducted a pre-registered individual participant data meta-analysis (IPD-MA) to examine this relationship for adult depression. This meta-analytic strategy can reduce variability by standardizing data analysis across primary studies. Methods: We included studies examining the efficacy of five treatments for adult depression and assessing interpersonal problems at baseline. One-stage IPD-MA was conducted with three-level mixed models to determine whether baseline overall interpersonal distress, agency, and communion predicted depressive symptom level at post-treatment, 12-month, and 24-month follow-up. The moderating effect of treatment type was also investigated. Results: Ten studies (including n = 1282 participants) met inclusion criteria. Only overall interpersonal distress was negatively related with outcomes at post-treatment (gamma = 0.11, CI95[0.06, 0.16], r = 0.11), 12-month followup (gamma = 0.17, CI95[0.08, 0.25], r = 0.17), and 24-month follow-up (gamma = 0.16, CI95[0.05, 0.26], r = 0.16), indicative of smaller effect sizes. The agency and communion dimensions were not significantly related to outcome. Treatment type did not significantly moderate interpersonal distress-outcome associations. Discussion: Results show a small association between patient baseline overall interpersonal distress and subsequent depression treatment outcome in brief treatments for depression. Further studies might require to account for therapist effects. Registration number osf.io/u46t7
Original languageEnglish
Article number102570
Number of pages11
JournalClinical Psychology Review
Volume118
Early online date27 Mar 2025
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2025

Keywords

  • Interpersonal distress
  • Outcome
  • Depression
  • Treatment
  • Individual participants data meta-analysis
  • IPD
  • TERM DYNAMIC PSYCHOTHERAPY
  • COGNITIVE THERAPY
  • MAJOR DEPRESSION
  • PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES
  • IMPACT MESSAGES
  • INVENTORY
  • IMPROVEMENT
  • ALLIANCE
  • ATTACHMENT
  • SEVERITY

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Interpersonal problems as a predictor of treatment outcome in adult depression: An individual participant data meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this