Background: Positive expectations play an important role in effective treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD). The way a study is contextualized modulates prognostic expectations. Aims: The aim of the study… Click to show full abstract
Background: Positive expectations play an important role in effective treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD). The way a study is contextualized modulates prognostic expectations. Aims: The aim of the study was to test the effect of differing information regarding the rationale given to participants for a study on depression symptoms. Method: Sixty-nine participants with depression symptoms participated in an online study with two conditions. In random order, half were invited to participate in a treatment study and half in a cognition study. After completing the baseline assessment, participants received one of two self-help manuals. Post-assessment was conducted six weeks later. Results: Only about 64% of the participants were reached for post-assessment, and adherence was low. However, our results offer the first evidence that stronger improvements emerged in participants who were told the trial was a treatment study compared with a cognition study. Conclusion: Information given about the rationale for a study could influence symptom reduction in online treatments for patients with MDD. Future (online) studies should attempt to replicate these results.
               
Click one of the above tabs to view related content.