title: "Meta-Analysis of Dropout in Treatments for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder": Correction to Imel et al. (2013).
abstract: Reports an error in "Meta-analysis of dropout in treatments for posttraumatic stress disorder" by Zac E. Imel, Kevin Laska, Matthew Jakupcak and Tracy L. Simpson (Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 2013[Jun], Vol 81[3], 394-404). There are two errors in the Results section. Each is described alongside the corrected results. Corrections did not influence interpretation of the results. Neither the magnitude of effects nor statistical significance of any results is substantively altered. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2013-01522-001.) Objective: Many patients drop out of treatments for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD); some clinicians believe that trauma-focused treatments increase dropout.
  
  
  METHODS
  We conducted a meta-analysis of dropout among active treatments in clinical trials for PTSD (42 studies; 17 direct comparisons).
  
  
  RESULTS
  The average dropout rate was 18%, but it varied significantly across studies. Group modality and greater number of sessions, but not trauma focus, predicted increased dropout. When the meta-analysis was restricted to direct comparisons of active treatments, there were no differences in dropout. Differences in trauma focus between treatments in the same study did not predict dropout. However, trauma-focused treatments resulted in higher dropout compared with present-centered therapy (PCT), a treatment originally designed as a control but now listed as a research-supported intervention for PTSD.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Dropout varies between active interventions for PTSD across studies, but variability is primarily driven by differences between studies. There do not appear to be systematic differences across active interventions when they are directly compared in the same study. The degree of clinical attention placed on the traumatic event does not appear to be a primary cause of dropout from active treatments. However, comparisons of PCT may be an exception to this general pattern, perhaps because of a restriction of variability in trauma focus among comparisons of active treatments. More research is needed comparing trauma-focused interventions to trauma-avoidant treatments such as PCT. (PsycINFO Database Record