Search

Background Knowledge on adverse events in psychotherapy for youth with OCD is sparse. No official guidelines exist for defining or monitoring adverse events in psychotherapy. Recent recommendations call for more qualitative and quantitative assessment of adverse events in psychotherapy trials. This mixed methods study aims to expand knowledge on adverse events in psychotherapy for youth with OCD. Methods This is an analysis plan for a convergent mixed methods study within a randomized clinical trial (the TECTO trial). We include at least 128 youth aged 8–17 years with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Participants are randomized to either family-based cognitive behavioral therapy (FCBT) or family-based psychoeducation and relaxation training (FPRT). Adverse events are monitored quantitatively with the Negative Effects Questionnaire. Furthermore, we assess psychiatric symptoms, global functioning, quality of life, and family factors to investigate predictors for adverse events. We conduct semi-structured qualitative interviews with all youths and their parents on their experience of adverse events in FCBT or FPRT. For the mixed methods analysis, we will merge 1) a qualitative content analysis with descriptive statistics comparing the types, frequencies, and severity of adverse events; 2) a qualitative content analysis of the perceived causes for adverse events with prediction models for adverse events; and 3) a thematic analysis of the participants’ treatment evaluation with a correlational analysis of adverse events and OCD severity. Discussion The in-depth mixed methods analysis can inform 1) safer and more effective psychotherapy for OCD; 2) instruments and guidelines for monitoring adverse events; and 3) patient information on potential adverse events. The main limitation is risk of missing data., Background: Knowledge on adverse events in psychotherapy for youth with OCD is sparse. No official guidelines exist for defining or monitoring adverse events in psychotherapy. Recent recommendations call for more qualitative and quantitative assessment of adverse events in psychotherapy trials. This mixed methods study aims to expand knowledge on adverse events in psychotherapy for youth with OCD. Methods: This is an analysis plan for a convergent mixed methods study within a randomized clinical trial (the TECTO trial). We include at least 128 youth aged 8–17 years with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Participants are randomized to either family-based cognitive behavioral therapy (FCBT) or family-based psychoeducation and relaxation training (FPRT). Adverse events are monitored quantitatively with the Negative Effects Questionnaire. Furthermore, we assess psychiatric symptoms, global functioning, quality of life, and family factors to investigate predictors for adverse events. We conduct semi-structured qualitative interviews with all youths and their parents on their experience of adverse events in FCBT or FPRT. For the mixed methods analysis, we will merge 1) a qualitative content analysis with descriptive statistics comparing the types, frequencies, and severity of adverse events; 2) a qualitative content analysis of the perceived causes for adverse events with prediction models for adverse events; and 3) a thematic analysis of the participants’ treatment evaluation with a correlational analysis of adverse events and OCD severity. Discussion: The in-depth mixed methods analysis can inform 1) safer and more effective psychotherapy for OCD; 2) instruments and guidelines for monitoring adverse events; and 3) patient information on potential adverse events. The main limitation is risk of missing data. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03595098. Registered on July 23, 2018.

Background: Artificial intelligence tools have the potential to objectively identify youth in need of mental health care. Speech signals have shown promise as a source for predicting various psychiatric conditions and transdiagnostic symptoms. Objective: We designed a study testing the association between obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) diagnosis and symptom severity on vocal features in children and adolescents. Here, we present an analysis plan and statistical report for the study to document our a priori hypotheses and increase the robustness of the findings of our planned study. Methods: Audio recordings of clinical interviews of 47 children and adolescents with OCD and 17 children and adolescents without a psychiatric diagnosis will be analyzed. Youths were between 8 and 17 years old. We will test the effect of OCD diagnosis on computationally derived scores of vocal activation using ANOVA. To test the effect of OCD severity classifications on the same computationally derived vocal scores, we will perform a logistic regression. Finally, we will attempt to create an improved indicator of OCD severity by refining the model with more relevant labels. Models will be adjusted for age and gender. Model validation strategies are outlined. Results: Simulated results are presented. The actual results using real data will be presented in future publications. Conclusions: A major strength of this study is that we will include age and gender in our models to increase classification accuracy. A major challenge is the suboptimal quality of the audio recordings, which are representative of in-the-wild data and a large body of recordings collected during other clinical trials. This preregistered analysis plan and statistical report will increase the validity of the interpretations of the upcoming results.

Background: Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a debilitating psychiatric disorder which affects up to 3% of children and adolescents. OCD in children and adolescents is generally treated with cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), which, in more severely affected patients, can be combined with antidepressant medication. The TECTO trial aims to compare the benefits and harms of family-based CBT (FCBT) versus family-based psychoeducation/relaxation training (FPRT) in children and adolescents aged 8 to 17 years. This statistical analysis plan outlines the planned statistical analyses for the TECTO trial. Methods: The TECTO trial is an investigator-initiated, independently funded, single-centre, parallel-group, superiority randomised clinical trial. Both groups undergo 14 sessions of 75 min each during a period of 16 weeks with either FCBT or FPRT depending on the allocation. Participants are randomised stratified by age and baseline Children’s Yale–Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (CY-BOCS) score. The primary outcome is the CY-BOCS score. Secondary outcomes are health-related quality of life assessed using KIDSCREEN-10 and adverse events assessed by the Negative Effects Questionnaire (NEQ). Primary and secondary outcomes are assessed at the end of the intervention. Continuous outcomes will be analysed using linear regression adjusted for the stratification variables and baseline value of the continuous outcome. Dichotomous outcomes will be analysed using logistic regression adjusted for the stratification variables. The statistical analyses will be carried out by two independent blinded statisticians. Discussion: This statistical analysis plan includes a detailed predefined description of how data will be analysed and presented in the main publication before unblinding of study data. Statistical analysis plans limit selective reporting bias. This statistical analysis plan will increase the validity of the final trial results. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.go

BACKGROUND: Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is the recommended first-line treatment for children and adolescents with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), but evidence concerning treatment-specific benefits and harms compared with other interventions is limited. Furthermore, high risk-of-bias in most trials prevent firm conclusions regarding the efficacy of CBT. We investigate the benefits and harms of family-based CBT (FCBT) versus family-based psychoeducation and relaxation training (FPRT) in youth with OCD in a trial designed to reduce risk-of-bias.METHODS: This is an investigator-initiated, independently funded, single-centre, parallel group superiority randomised clinical trial (RCT). Outcome assessors, data managers, statisticians, and conclusion drawers are blinded. From child and adolescent mental health services we include patients aged 8-17 years with a primary OCD diagnosis and an entry score of ≥16 on the Children's Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (CY-BOCS). We exclude patients with comorbid illness contraindicating trial participation; intelligence quotient < 70; or treatment with CBT, PRT, antidepressant or antipsychotic medication within the last 6 months prior to trial entry. Participants are randomised 1:1 to the experimental intervention (FCBT) versus the control intervention (FPRT) each consisting of 14 75-min sessions. All therapists deliver both interventions. Follow-up assessments occur in week 4, 8 and 16 (end-of-treatment). The primary outcome is OCD symptom severity assessed with CY-BOCS at end-of-trial. Secondary outcomes are quality-of-life and adverse events. Based on sample size estimation, a minimum of 128 participants (64 in each intervention group) are included.DISCUSSION: In our trial design we aim to reduce risk-of-bias, enhance generalisability, and broaden the outcome measures by: 1) conducting an investigator-initiated, independently funded RCT; 2) blinding investigators; 3) investigating a represent

Objective: To assess benefits and harms of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) versus no intervention or versus other interventions for pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Method: We searched for randomized clinical trials of CBT for pediatric OCD. Primary outcomes were OCD severity, serious adverse events, and level of functioning. Secondary outcomes were quality of life and adverse events. Remission from OCD was included as an exploratory outcome. We assessed risk of bias and evaluated the certainty of the evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Results: Nine trials (N = 645) were included comparing CBT with no intervention and 3 trials (N = 146) comparing CBT with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Compared with no intervention, CBT decreased OCD severity (mean difference [MD] = −8.51, 95% CI = −10.84 to −6.18, p < .00001, low certainty), improved level of functioning (patient-rated: standardized MD [SMD] = −0.90, 95% CI = −1.19 to −0.62, p < .00001, very low certainty; parent-rated: SMD = −0.68, 95% CI = −1.12 to −0.23, p = .003, very low certainty), had similar proportions of participants with adverse events (risk ratio = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.93−1.22, p = .39, GRADE: low certainty), and was associated with reduced risk of still having OCD (risk ratio = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.37−0.67, p < .00001, very low certainty). We had insufficient data to assess the effect of CBT versus no intervention on serious adverse events and quality of life. Compared with SSRIs, CBT led to similar decreases in OCD severity (MD = −0.75, 95% CI = −3.79 to 2.29, p = .63, GRADE: very low certainty), and was associated with similar risk of still having OCD (risk ratio = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.66−1.09, p = .20, very low certainty). We had insufficient data to assess the effect of CBT versus SSRIs on serious adverse events, level of functioning, quality of life, and adverse events. Conclusion: CBT may be more effectiv