Supporting Information S1 - Comparative Efficacy of Seven Psychotherapeutic Interventions for Patients with Depression: A Network Meta-Analysis

Supporting information to the manuscript. Contents: Text S1. WinBUGs model for main analysis. Text S2. Bibliography of 198 studies included in the meta-analysis. Text S3. PRISMA checklist. Table S1. Bibliography of 198 studies included in the meta-analysis. Table S2. Description of individual studies (methodological characteristics and intervention). Table S3. Aspects of study quality in small to moderate to and large studies (column percentages). Table S4. Relative effect sizes (and 95% credibility intervals) of psychotherapeutic interventions and control conditions from network meta-analyses restricted to at least moderately sized (upper triangle) and large (lower triangle) studies. Figure S1. Forest plot of inconsistency in closed loops with 95% confidence interval. Figure S2. Funnel plot of studies comparing psychotherapeutic interventions with waitlist to including prediction lines from meta-regression models with the standard error as an explanatory variable and 5% contour areas to display areas of significance and non-significance. Figure S3. Forest plot of inconsistency in closed loops with 95% confidence interval (moderately sized studies). Figure S4. Forest plot of inconsistency in closed loops with 95% confidence interval (large studies) Text S1. WinBUGs model for main analysis. Text S2. Bibliography of 198 studies included in the meta-analysis. Text S3. PRISMA checklist. Table S1. Bibliography of 198 studies included in the meta-analysis. Table S2. Description of individual studies (methodological characteristics and intervention). Table S3. Aspects of study quality in small to moderate to and large studies (column percentages). Table S4. Relative effect sizes (and 95% credibility intervals) of psychotherapeutic interventions and control conditions from network meta-analyses restricted to at least moderately sized (upper triangle) and large (lower triangle) studies. Figure S1. Forest plot of inconsistency in closed loops with 95% confidence interval. Figure S2. Funnel plot of studies comparing psychotherapeutic interventions with waitlist to including prediction lines from meta-regression models with the standard error as an explanatory variable and 5% contour areas to display areas of significance and non-significance. Figure S3. Forest plot of inconsistency in closed loops with 95% confidence interval (moderately sized studies). Figure S4. Forest plot of inconsistency in closed loops with 95% confidence interval (large studies) (DOCX)