This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Psychology High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Medicine High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Autism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Autism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of all aspects of autism and autistic culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutismWikipedia:WikiProject AutismTemplate:WikiProject AutismAutism Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

CBT has been shown to be moderately effective for treating chronic fatigue syndrome.^[1]

Although a systematic review the sole reference date from 2006 and and developments in advice on treatments for CFS have evolved, notably from the NIH https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M15-0338 CDC https://www.cdc.gov/me-cfs/treatment/index.html and NICE https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng206/chapter/Recommendations#managing-mecfs all of which strongly imply the text "CBT has been shown to be moderately effective for treating chronic fatigue syndrome" is a poor representation of current medical practice. The CFS article itself is structured on these more recent sources - NIH is from 2015, CDC is current and NICE published October 2021. Accordingly the text and reference has been edited from the article. In Vitro Infidelium (talk) 14:13, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My advice is edit the context of this reference so decent pointers to the current literatures exist. There's no need to make the perfect the enemy of the good here: simple having a footnote along the lines of "but see REFERENCE1 and REFERENCE2" can be very helpful both for readers who want to dig in and spotting slanted editing of the article. — Charles Stewart (talk) 18:56, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I find this sentence:

"Despite the increasing popularity of third-wave treatment approaches, reviews of studies reveal there may be no difference in the effectiveness compared with non-third wave CBT for the treatment of depression."

at the end of the section about third wave CBT misleading. The source (https://doi.org/10.1002%2F14651858.CD008704.pub2) states that the conclusion is made with very low confidence, from only three RCTs with a total of 144 participants, of which two were assessed as very low quality. So this is not "reviews of studies", but one review, and it doesn't "reveal" anything really, but only suggests something with low confidence, with the main takeaway being that there needs to be more research.

I would suggest leaving it out. SpookyFM (talk) 13:58, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 January 2024 and 24 April 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cbrads2 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Llj2.

— Assignment last updated by Llj2 (talk) 00:56, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the literature CBT can refer to a merger of Aaron Beck's CT and Ellis' REBT, but it can also refer to a set of Cognitive and Behavioural Therapies (also CBT). This include Cognitive Therapy, Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT), Schema Therapy, Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT), and Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT). Then there are variation like TF-CBT which also comes under the Cognitive and Behavioural Therapies umbrella term. Behavioral Therapy which emphasizes changing behaviors through techniques like exposure therapy, systematic desensitization, and skills training to address specific problems or challenges, is an approach on its own but also used elsewhere. I don't think the current article makes it clear. It is also not clear on the disambiguation page. I tend to distinguish "Cognitive Behaviour Therapy" (CBT) from "Cognitive and Behavioural therapies" (the umbrella term) or "C/BT", such as in this paper reviewing Internet-based cognitive and behavioural therapies (I-C/BT)[1]. This distinction is probably more important to researcher such as those in behavioural neuroscience. But it would also help in the article to distinguish between the two different uses in this article and the relevant disambiguation page. --Notgain (talk) 10:02, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I flagged this a couple years ago but got no response Talk:CBT#Cognitive_behaviour_therapy_or_Cognitive_behaviour_therapies?.Maybe this is just a thing in the behavioural neuroscience school. Keen to get your input. --Notgain (talk) 10:24, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first paragraph currently states that CBT is one of the "most effective" treatments for substance use. The reference links to a website that is not a reliable source (I added the cn tags). This needs a reference or should be adjusted / or removed. The last paragraph in the lead current says, "When compared to psychoactive medications, review studies have found CBT alone to be as effective for treating less severe forms of... substance use disorders... " There are several other disorders listed but none of the references are for substance use disorders. So, I suggest a reliable source be added or this statement be adjusted accordingly. I've added a citation needed tag. Then in the section on "Substance use disorders" it says, CBT is "one of the most effective means of treatment for substance abuse and co-occurring mental health disorders." However, a 2019 systematic review doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001088.pub4 found "low-quality evidence of no difference between CBT and standard care" in terms of treatment outcomes. The review found "no difference between CBT and Motivational Interviewing (MI)" for "dual diagnosis" of both severe mental illness and substance misuse. The current evidence does not establish the superiority of CBT's effectiveness over standard care or other psychosocial interventions, such as MI. So this also needed to be adjusted accordingly. I added the disputed-section tags so we can discuss. --Notgain (talk) 12:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]