Cognitive therapy and behavioural activation are both widely applied and effective psychotherapies for depression, but it is unclear which works best for whom. Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis allows for examining moderators at the participant level and can provide more precise effect estimates than conventional meta-analysis, which is based on study-level data.

This article describes the protocol for a systematic review and IPD meta-analysis that aims to compare the efficacy of cognitive therapy and behavioural activation for adults with depression, and to explore moderators of treatment effect. (PROSPERO: CRD42022341602)

Systematic literature searches will be conducted in PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library, to identify randomised clinical trials comparing cognitive therapy and behavioural activation for adult acute-phase depression. Investigators of these trials will be invited to share their participant-level data. One-stage IPD meta-analyses will be conducted with mixed-effects models to assess treatment effects and to examine various available demographic, clinical and psychological participant characteristics as potential moderators. The primary outcome measure will be depressive symptom level at treatment completion. Secondary outcomes will include post-treatment anxiety, interpersonal functioning and quality of life, as well as follow-up outcomes.

To the best of our knowledge, this will be the first IPD meta-analysis concerning cognitive therapy versus behavioural activation for adult depression. This study has the potential to enhance our knowledge of depression treatment by using state-of-the-art statistical techniques to compare the efficacy of two widely used psychotherapies, and by shedding more light on which of these treatments might work best for whom.

Cognitive therapy for social anxiety disorder (CT-SAD) is recommended by NICE (2013) as a first-line intervention. Take up in routine services is limited by the need for up to 14 ninety-min face-to-face sessions, some of which are out of the office. An internet-based version of the treatment (iCT-SAD) with remote therapist support may achieve similar outcomes with less therapist time.

102 patients with social anxiety disorder were randomised to iCT-SAD, CT-SAD, or waitlist (WAIT) control, each for 14 weeks. WAIT patients were randomised to the treatments after wait. Assessments were at pre-treatment/wait, midtreatment/wait, posttreatment/wait, and follow-ups 3 & 12 months after treatment. The pre-registered (ISRCTN 95 458 747) primary outcome was the social anxiety disorder composite, which combines 6 independent assessor and patient self-report scales of social anxiety. Secondary outcomes included disability, general anxiety, depression and a behaviour test.

CT-SAD and iCT-SAD were both superior to WAIT on all measures. iCT-SAD did not differ from CT-SAD on the primary outcome at post-treatment or follow-up. Total therapist time in iCT-SAD was 6.45 h. CT-SAD required 15.8 h for the same reduction in social anxiety. Mediation analysis indicated that change in process variables specified in cognitive models accounted for 60% of the improvements associated with either treatment. Unlike the primary outcome, there was a significant but small difference in favour of CT-SAD on the behaviour test.

When compared to conventional face-to-face therapy, iCT-SAD can more than double the amount of symptom change associated with each therapist hour.

A standardised multi-site approach to manage paediatric post-operative chylothorax does not exist and leads to unnecessary practice variation. The Chylothorax Work Group utilised the Pediatric Critical Care Consortium infrastructure to address this gap.

Over 60 multi-disciplinary providers representing 22 centres convened virtually as a quality initiative to develop an algorithm to manage paediatric post-operative chylothorax. Agreement was objectively quantified for each recommendation in the algorithm by utilising an anonymous survey. “Consensus” was defined as ≥ 80% of responses as “agree” or “strongly agree” to a recommendation. In order to determine if the algorithm recommendations would be correctly interpreted in the clinical environment, we developed ex vivo simulations and surveyed patients who developed the algorithm and patients who did not.

The algorithm is intended for all children (<18 years of age) within 30 days of cardiac surgery. It contains rationale for 11 central chylothorax management recommendations; diagnostic criteria and evaluation, trial of fat-modified diet, stratification by volume of daily output, timing of first-line medical therapy for “low” and “high” volume patients, and timing and duration of fat-modified diet. All recommendations achieved “consensus” (agreement >80%) by the workgroup (range 81–100%). Ex vivo simulations demonstrated good understanding by developers (range 94–100%) and non-developers (73%–100%).

The quality improvement effort represents the first multi-site algorithm for the management of paediatric post-operative chylothorax. The algorithm includes transparent and objective measures of agreement and understanding. Agreement to the algorithm recommendations was >80%, and overall understanding was 94%.

A short, effective therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) could decrease barriers to implementation and uptake, reduce dropout, and ameliorate distressing symptoms in military personnel and veterans. This non-inferiority RCT evaluated the efficacy of 2-week massed prolonged exposure (MPE) therapy compared to standard 10-week prolonged exposure (SPE), the current gold standard treatment, in reducing PTSD severity in both active serving and veterans in a real-world health service system.

This single-blinded multi-site non-inferiority RCT took place in 12 health clinics across Australia. The primary outcome was PTSD symptom severity measured by the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5) at 12 weeks. 138 military personnel and veterans with PTSD were randomised. 71 participants were allocated to SPE, with 63 allocated to MPE.

The intention-to-treat sample included 138 participants, data were analysed for 134 participants (88.1% male, M = 46 years). The difference between the mean MPE and SPE group PTSD scores from baseline to 12 weeks-post therapy was 0.94 [95% confidence interval (CI) −4.19 to +6.07]. The upper endpoint of the 95% CI was below +7, indicating MPE was non-inferior to SPE. Significant rates of loss of PTSD diagnosis were found for both groups (MPE 53.8%, SPE 54.1%). Dropout rates were 4.8% (MPE) and 16.9% (SPE).

MPE was non-inferior to SPE in significantly reducing symptoms of PTSD. Significant reductions in symptom severity, low dropout rates, and loss of diagnosis indicate MPE is a feasible, accessible, and effective treatment. Findings demonstrate novel methods to deliver gold-standard treatments for PTSD should be routinely considered.