No difference in effect size was fo

No difference in effect size was found between studies comparing CBT to psychological (Hedges’ g = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.38–0.66, P < .0001) versus pill placebo (Hedges’ g = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.36–0.97, P < .0001; QB = 0.71, df = 1, P = n.s.).Furthermore,no difference inpre–post effect sizes for placebo groupswas found between psychological (Hedges’ g = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.44–.63)and pill placebos(Hedges’ g = 0.45,95%CI = 0.35–0.55; QB = 1.47, df = 1, P = n.s.).Finally,no difference was found between effect sizes of self-report measures(Hedges’ g = 0.53,95%CI = 0.40–0.67, P < .0001) and clinician-administered measures(Hedges’ g = 0.50,95%CI = 0.36– 0.64, P < .0001; QB = 0.13,df = 1, P = n.s.).

結果 (繁體中文) 1:

在效果大小沒有差異比較CBT心理研究（樹籬之間發現'克= 0.52，95％CI = 0.38-0.66，P <0.0001）對丸安慰劑（樹籬'G = 0.66，95％CI = 0.36-0.97 ，P <0.0001; QB = 0.71，DF = 1，P = NS）。此外，沒有差別inpre-交效果尺寸安慰劑組
發現心理之間（樹籬'G = 0.53，95％CI = 0.44-
0.63 ）和丸安慰劑（樹籬'G = 0.45,95％CI = 0.35-0.55; QB = 1.47，DF = 1，P = NS）。最後，沒有發現差異的自我報告的措施的影響大小（樹籬'之間克= 0.53,95％CI = 0.40-0.67，P <0.0001）和臨床醫生給藥的措施（樹籬'G = 0.50,95％CI = 0.36- 0.64，P <0.0001; QB = 0.13，DF = 1，P = NS）。

結果 (繁體中文) 2:

比較CBT與心理（對沖的g = 0.52，95%CI = 0.38±0.66，P = 0.0001）與藥丸安慰劑（對沖'g = 0.66，95%CI = 0.36~0.97，P = 0.0001）之間的研究在效果大小上沒有差異;QB = 0.71，df = 1，P = n.s.）。此外，安慰劑組無前後效應大小的差異
在心理之間發現（對沖 g = 0.53，95% CI = 0.44]
.63）和藥丸安慰劑（對沖 g = 0.45，95%CI = 0.35±0.55;QB = 1.47，df = 1，P = n.s.最後，在自報告措施的效果大小（Hedges' g = 0.53，95%CI = 0.40±0.67，P = 0.0001）和臨床醫生管理的措施（對沖' g = 0.50，95%CI = 0.36= 0.64，P = 0.0001）之間沒有差異;QB = 0.13，df = 1，P = n.s.）。

結果 (繁體中文) 3:

在比較CBT與心理（Hedges'g=0.52，95%CI=0.38-0.66，P<0.0001）和安慰劑（Hedges'g=0.66，95%CI=0.36-0.97，P<0.0001；QB=0.71，df=1，P=n.s.）的研究中，沒有發現療效大小的差异。此外，安慰劑組的治療後療效大小沒有差异
在心理上（Hedges'g=0.53，95%CI=0.44-
.63）和安慰劑（Hedges'g=0.45,95%CI=0.35–0.55；QB=1.47，df=1，P=n.s.）。最後，自我報告措施（Hedges'g=0.53,95%CI=0.40–0.67，P<0.0001）和臨床醫生管理措施（Hedges'g=0.50,95%CI=0.36–0.64，P<0.0001；QB=0.13，df=1，P= n.s）的效果大小沒有差异。