Cognitive behavior therapy care management

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT did not produce significantly greater improvement than enhanced usual care on clinician-rated GAD severity (GADSS), despite a numerically larger mean change in CBT (2.8 points) than EUC (1.4 point

Effect: null; mean change 2.8 (CBT) vs 1.4 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)

CBT significantly improved general mental health quality of life compared with enhanced usual care in older adults with GAD in primary care (MCS 49.6 vs 45.3, p=.008), with gains maintained over 12-mo

Effect: improvement; MCS 49.6 vs 45.3; CI: 95% CI 47.4 to 51.8 (CBT) vs 95% CI 42.6 to 47.9 (EUC)