The random effects meta-analysis identified a large effect for CBT relative to comparison conditions (g=1.21, 95% CI: 0.83, 1.59, z=6.17, p<0.001) (Figure 2). Visual inspection of the forest plot, Q statistic, and I2 statistic identified the presence of significant heterogeneity [Q(9)=33.37 p<0.001, I2=73.03%]. Although visual inspection of the funnel plot suggested that publication bias may exist, Egger’s test for bias indicated that publication bias was not significant (t=1.03, p=0.33). The analog-to-ANOVA revealed that a significant difference between active comparison trials and non-active comparison trials [Q(1)=4.56, p=0.03]. Given the significant difference between control comparison conditions, the summary effect was recalculated with active comparison trials excluded. Results identified a larger treatment effect (g=1.48, 95% CI: 1.04, 1.92, z=6.58, p<0.001) with less heterogeneity [Q(6)=15.19, p=0.02, I2=60.50%] among non-active comparison trials. For active comparison trials, a moderate-to-large effect was observed (g=0.71, 95% CI: 0.16, 1.26, z=2.54, p=0.01), with significant heterogeneity [Q(2)=7.60 p=0.02, I2=73.69%] (Figure 2). Visual inspection of the funnel plot and Egger’s test (t=1.89, p=0.31) for bias indicated that publication bias was not significant.
