CBGT, cognitive-behavioral group therapy; GPT, group psychotherapy; CGI, Clinical Global Impression Scale for social Anxiety Disorder; LSAS, Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale. The effect sizes (Cohen's D) that were computed for Heimberg et al.'s study represent assessment after 6 weeks (midtreatment) and 12 weeks (posttreatment). The control condition in that study (educational supportive group therapy) is also compared to GPT in the table.
COGNITIVE-BEHAVIORAL GROUP THERAPY VERSUS GROUP PSYCHOTHERAPY FOR SOCIAL ANXIETY DISORDER AMONG COLLEGE STUDENTS: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Version of Record online: 9 SEP 2013
© 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Depression and Anxiety
Volume 30, Issue 11, pages 1145–1146, November 2013
How to Cite
Bjornsson, A. S., Brosse, L. C. B. A. L., Carey, G., Hauser, M., Mackiewicz Seghete, K. L., Schulz-Heik, R. J., Weatherley, D., Erwin, B. A. and Craighead, W. E. (2013), COGNITIVE-BEHAVIORAL GROUP THERAPY VERSUS GROUP PSYCHOTHERAPY FOR SOCIAL ANXIETY DISORDER AMONG COLLEGE STUDENTS: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL. Depress. Anxiety, 30: 1145–1146. doi: 10.1002/da.22180
- Issue online: 4 NOV 2013
- Version of Record online: 9 SEP 2013
Vol. 28, Issue 11, 1034–1042, Version of Record online: 24 AUG 2011
Data entry errors were noted in the 2011 article titled “Cognitive-Behavioral Group Therapy versus Group Psychotherapy for Social Anxiety Disorder among College Students: A Randomized Controlled Trial” by Bjornsson et al. (Depression and Anxiety, 28: 1034–1042). However, there were no changes to any of the findings or conclusions of the study. We present the corrected data below:
In Table 3, seven individuals (31.8%) in the cognitive-behavioral group therapy group had avoidant personality disorder versus six individuals (26.1%) in the group psychotherapy group. We present the corrected data in the following subsection of the Results Section.
|Measure; treatment condition||Baseline (n = 45)||Posttreatment (n = 41)||Cohen's D||Cohen's D (Heimberg et al.*) 6 w/12 w|
INDEPENDENT ASSESSOR ANALYSES
There was an overall improvement by time across treatment conditions on the Clinical Global Impression Scale (F(1, 39) = 9.70, P < .01) and the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) total score (F(1, 39) = 40.58, P < .001). There were no statistically significant differences between the two treatments, when regressing treatment on posttreatment ratings, and controlling for baseline LSAS scores, on the fear subscale (t(38) = 1.35, P = .19), the avoidance subscale (t(38) = 0.24, P = .81), or the total score (t(38) = 0.82, P = .42).
There was an overall improvement by time across treatment conditions, on the Social Phobia Scale (SPS); F(1, 38) = 49.49, P < .001, the Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS); F(1, 39) = 33.32, P < .001, and the Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale (BFNE); F(1, 39) = 23.44, P < .001.
Consistent with the independent assessment interview data, there were no differences between the two treatments as measured by self-report questionnaires. For example, when regressing treatment on posttreatment ratings, and controlling for baseline scores, on the SPS scale (t(37) = 0.07, P = .94), the SIAS scale (t(38) = −0.21, P = .83) and the BFNE scale (t(38) = 0.40, P = .69), there were no statistically significant differences (see Table 4). Tables 3 and 4 have now been corrected, and are presented below.
|Measure; treatment||Baseline (n = 45)||Posttreatm (n = 41)||Cohen's D||Cohen's D (Heimberg et al.*) 12 w|