TY - JOUR
T1 - The impact of patient choice on uptake, adherence, and outcomes across depression, anxiety, and eating disorders
T2 - A systematic review and meta-analysis
AU - Johnson, Catherine
AU - Radunz, Marcela
AU - Linardon, Jake
AU - Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, Matthew
AU - Williamson, Paul
AU - Wade, Tracey D.
PY - 2025/2/7
Y1 - 2025/2/7
N2 - Growing evidence highlights the critical role of patient choice of treatment, with significant benefits for outcomes found in some studies. While four meta-analyses have previously examined the association between treatment choice and outcomes in mental health, robust conclusions have been limited by the inclusion of studies with biased preference trial designs. The current systematic review included 30 studies across three common and frequently comorbid mental health disorders (depression N = 23; anxiety, N = 5; eating disorders, N = 2) including 7055 participants (M age 42.5 years, SD 11.7; 69.5% female). Treatment choice most often occurred between psychotherapy and antidepressant medication (43.3%), followed by choice between two different forms of psychotherapy, or elements within psychotherapy (36.7%). There were insufficient studies with stringent designs to conduct meta-analyses for anxiety or eating disorders as outcomes, or for treatment uptake. Treatment choice significantly improved outcomes for depression (d = 0.17, n = 18) and decreased therapy dropout, both in a combined sample targeting depression (n = 12), anxiety (n = 4) and eating disorders (n = 1; OR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.17, 1.83), and in a smaller sample of the depression studies alone (OR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.05, 2.59). All studies evaluated the impact of adults making treatment choices with none examining the effect of choice in adolescents. Clear directions in future research are indicated, in terms of designing studies that can adequately test the treatment choice and outcome association in anxiety and eating disorder treatment, and in youth.
AB - Growing evidence highlights the critical role of patient choice of treatment, with significant benefits for outcomes found in some studies. While four meta-analyses have previously examined the association between treatment choice and outcomes in mental health, robust conclusions have been limited by the inclusion of studies with biased preference trial designs. The current systematic review included 30 studies across three common and frequently comorbid mental health disorders (depression N = 23; anxiety, N = 5; eating disorders, N = 2) including 7055 participants (M age 42.5 years, SD 11.7; 69.5% female). Treatment choice most often occurred between psychotherapy and antidepressant medication (43.3%), followed by choice between two different forms of psychotherapy, or elements within psychotherapy (36.7%). There were insufficient studies with stringent designs to conduct meta-analyses for anxiety or eating disorders as outcomes, or for treatment uptake. Treatment choice significantly improved outcomes for depression (d = 0.17, n = 18) and decreased therapy dropout, both in a combined sample targeting depression (n = 12), anxiety (n = 4) and eating disorders (n = 1; OR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.17, 1.83), and in a smaller sample of the depression studies alone (OR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.05, 2.59). All studies evaluated the impact of adults making treatment choices with none examining the effect of choice in adolescents. Clear directions in future research are indicated, in terms of designing studies that can adequately test the treatment choice and outcome association in anxiety and eating disorder treatment, and in youth.
KW - choice
KW - eating disorders
KW - mental health
KW - meta-analysis
KW - preference
KW - review
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85217536046&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://purl.org/au-research/grants/NHMRC/2025665
U2 - 10.1017/S0033291725000066
DO - 10.1017/S0033291725000066
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85217536046
SN - 0033-2917
VL - 55
JO - Psychological Medicine
JF - Psychological Medicine
M1 - e32
ER -