al.). The symposia of the symposia of the symposia of the symposia of the symposia of the symposia of the symposia of the symposia of the sym One positive point of this meta-analysis is that it examined a large array of studies, but this study did not, however, examine the results of combination therapy. More recent studies have taken into account both the individual impacts and combined impacts of CBT and pharmacotherapy. A meta-analysis of studies performed on the subject showed that a combined treatment yielded stronger results than either treatment alone (Cuijpers et al., 2001). al., 2013). This meta-analysis demonstrated that although CBT has consistently yielded efficacious results while used as the solitary treatment for depression, these results can be amplified with the inclusion of clinical intervention in the patient treatment plan. This meta-analysis was effective in narrowing the pool of studies examined by excluding studies based on criteria such as lack of control group, no random assignment, and studies including …show more content…
Similar to the meta-analysis performed by Cuijpers et al. al., the timespan of this study was also relatively short. Overall, this study found that medication worked well in conjunction with CBT in a circular way: the general sense of numbness from medication (the ‘drug loop’) often culminated in a crisis that brought patients to seek out CBT, and when practiced together, CBT helped lessen the numbness of the ‘drug loop’ and the medications helped facilitate CBT and make it more accessible for patients (Bayliss & Holttum). Current studies show how combination therapy is more effective than isolated therapies. Not only are the patients getting more support from their doctors, but CBT and medication work together to uplift each other with statistically significant positive outcomes (Bayliss & Holttum 2015). One common theme among each of these papers is that they each call for further research into the subject, addressing the need for more long-term