Evidence Hub

Neurocognitive Functioning in Adults with Trichotillomania: Predictors of Treatment Response and Symptom Severity in a Randomized Control Trial

K. E. Barber, Douglas W. Woods, Thilo Deckersbach, Christopher C. Bauer, Scott N. Compton, M. Twohig, E. Ricketts, J. Robinson et al.

Behaviour Research and Therapy, 2024

88 participants · 3 citations

Abstract

Trichotillomania (TTM) is associated with impairments in response inhibition and cognitive flexibility, but it is unclear how such impairments relate to treatment outcome. The present study examined pre-treatment response inhibition and cognitive flexibility as predictors of treatment outcome, change in these domains from pre- to post-treatment, and associations with TTM severity. Participants were drawn from a randomized controlled trial comparing acceptance-enhanced behavior therapy (AEBT) to psychoeducation and supportive therapy (PST) for TTM. Adults completed assessments at pre-treatment (n=88) and following 12 weeks of treatment (n=68). Response inhibition and cognitive flexibility were assessed using the Stop Signal Task and Object Alternation Task, respectively. Participants completed the MGH-Hairpulling Scale. Independent evaluators administered the NIMH-Trichotillomania Severity Scale and Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement Scale. Higher pre-treatment TTM severity was associated with poorer pre-treatment cognitive flexibility, but not response inhibition. Better pre-treatment response inhibition performance predicted positive treatment response and lower post-treatment TTM symptom severity, irrespective of treatment assignment. Cognitive flexibility did not predict treatment response. After controlling for age, neither neurocognitive variable changed during treatment. Response inhibition and cognitive flexibility appear uniquely related to hair pulling severity…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 88 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free