Jyssica Seebeck, Brigham Young University
Psychology
Until recently, there were very few meta-analytic comparisons between individual and group formats to determine if reliable outcomes were produced. However, Burlingame, Strauss, and Joyce (2013) recently identified a dozen diagnosis specific meta-analyses (bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, etc.) and twenty-three new studies published over the last decade that test for differential format efficacy/effectiveness. This meta-analysis builds upon these by selecting the most rigorous studies drawn from these meta-analyses. More specifically we selected studies that tested equivalent treatments enabling us to make strong causal conclusions about differential efficacy/effectiveness. We began with published meta-analyses that tested for format differences, went to each and determined whether individual studies summarized in these meta-analyses compared treatments that were equivalent. If they did, the study was included herein. We also conducted a literature search to identify studies that tested individual and group treatments not included in the aforementioned meta-analyses. Computed effect sizes tested differential outcomes (group versus individual) and also estimated the effectiveness of format compared to waitlist controls. Moderator variables of outcomes, such as group type and theoretical orientation were also tested. Results are reviewed with reference to treatment recommendations, feasibility of implementation, and evidence based recommendations.