| Autor: |
Mattos, Bernardo Paim de, Pascher, Eric, Catelan, Ramiro Figueiredo, Eckert, Igor |
| Zdroj: |
Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology; Nov2024, Vol. 92 Issue 11, p779-781, 3p |
| Abstrakt: |
This brief commentary critically examines the study "Psychotherapies for the Treatment of Borderline Personality Disorder: A Systematic Review" by Crotty et al. (2023) It highlights several methodological and reporting concerns that impact the study's credibility and conclusions. Key issues include the retrospective registration of the study protocol, discrepancies in authorship and protocol content, lack of clarity in inclusion and exclusion criteria, and limitations in geographical scope without clear justification. Furthermore, the letter discusses inconsistencies in the risk of bias and quality of evidence assessments, particularly in the application of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. These methodological shortcomings question the study's findings, contrasting with other comprehensive reviews in the field. The critique emphasizes the importance of methodological rigor and transparency in systematic reviews, especially those influencing clinical practice and policy decisions in mental health care. What is the public health significance of this article?: This critique raises important concerns about the methodological rigor and reporting in systematic reviews on psychotherapies for borderline personality disorder. Ensuring methodological integrity is vital for patient safety and effective treatment planning in clinical practice. Addressing these issues will enhance the credibility of research findings and guide future research, impacting public health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: |
Supplemental Index |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
