Article Accepted Manuscript

Cognitive bias modification in alcohol use disorder and problematic drinking: A revised and updated IPD Bayesian meta-analysis

Author(s) / Creator(s)

Pan, Ting
Zhao, Xiaochang
Bartoš, František
Larsen, Helle
Manning, Victoria
Boffo, Marilisa
Wiers, Reinout W.

Abstract / Description

Background: Recent advances in Cognitive Bias Modification (CBM) for problematic drinking, including Alcohol Use Disorder, alongside methodological refinements, warrant an update of the Individual Participant Data (IPD) Bayesian meta-analysis. This study integrates new datasets, focuses on alcohol CBM, and applies a two-stage IPD framework to examine CBM's effects on cognitive bias, alcohol consumption, and relapse. Methods: A two-stage IPD Bayesian meta-analysis was performed, supplemented by frequentist sensitivity analyses. The first stage estimated study-specific CBM effects, the second stage pooled these to examine within-study moderators (adherence, addiction severity) and between-study moderators (CBM type, control condition, additional therapy, training congruency, and context). Results: 23 studies with 8297 participants were included. CBM showed a small unadjusted effect on bias (d = −0.18, 95% CrI [−0.32, 0.00], BF₁₀ = 10.88) and relapse (log OR = −0.26, 95% CrI [−0.38, −0.14], BF₁₀ = 155.07; number needed to treat = 18.7), but not on alcohol consumption (d = 0.003, 95% CrI [0.00, 0.06], BF₁₀ = 0.08). Effects were attenuated after adjusting for moderators. Moderator analyses revealed that face-to-face CBM context (unadjusted and within-study adjusted) and additional psychological therapy (within-study adjusted) were associated with greater bias reduction, and higher training intensity (unadjusted) was related to better relapse prevention. Frequentist sensitivity analyses largely supported these findings. Conclusions: CBM reduced alcohol-related biases and relapse risk. Although overall evidence was no longer supported after adjusting for moderators, moderator analyses suggest CBM can be effective under specific conditions (e.g., face-to-face delivery, alongside therapy, higher training intensity). These findings underscore the need for refined, context-sensitive CBM protocols in alcohol interventions.

Persistent Identifier

Date of first publication

2026-02-05

Journal title

Clinical Psychology Review

Publisher

PsychArchives

Publication status

acceptedVersion

Review status

peerReviewed

Is version of

Citation

  • Author(s) / Creator(s)
    Pan, Ting
  • Author(s) / Creator(s)
    Zhao, Xiaochang
  • Author(s) / Creator(s)
    Bartoš, František
  • Author(s) / Creator(s)
    Larsen, Helle
  • Author(s) / Creator(s)
    Manning, Victoria
  • Author(s) / Creator(s)
    Boffo, Marilisa
  • Author(s) / Creator(s)
    Wiers, Reinout W.
  • PsychArchives acquisition timestamp
    2026-02-05T15:34:49Z
  • Made available on
    2026-02-05T15:34:49Z
  • Date of first publication
    2026-02-05
  • Abstract / Description
    Background: Recent advances in Cognitive Bias Modification (CBM) for problematic drinking, including Alcohol Use Disorder, alongside methodological refinements, warrant an update of the Individual Participant Data (IPD) Bayesian meta-analysis. This study integrates new datasets, focuses on alcohol CBM, and applies a two-stage IPD framework to examine CBM's effects on cognitive bias, alcohol consumption, and relapse. Methods: A two-stage IPD Bayesian meta-analysis was performed, supplemented by frequentist sensitivity analyses. The first stage estimated study-specific CBM effects, the second stage pooled these to examine within-study moderators (adherence, addiction severity) and between-study moderators (CBM type, control condition, additional therapy, training congruency, and context). Results: 23 studies with 8297 participants were included. CBM showed a small unadjusted effect on bias (d = −0.18, 95% CrI [−0.32, 0.00], BF₁₀ = 10.88) and relapse (log OR = −0.26, 95% CrI [−0.38, −0.14], BF₁₀ = 155.07; number needed to treat = 18.7), but not on alcohol consumption (d = 0.003, 95% CrI [0.00, 0.06], BF₁₀ = 0.08). Effects were attenuated after adjusting for moderators. Moderator analyses revealed that face-to-face CBM context (unadjusted and within-study adjusted) and additional psychological therapy (within-study adjusted) were associated with greater bias reduction, and higher training intensity (unadjusted) was related to better relapse prevention. Frequentist sensitivity analyses largely supported these findings. Conclusions: CBM reduced alcohol-related biases and relapse risk. Although overall evidence was no longer supported after adjusting for moderators, moderator analyses suggest CBM can be effective under specific conditions (e.g., face-to-face delivery, alongside therapy, higher training intensity). These findings underscore the need for refined, context-sensitive CBM protocols in alcohol interventions.
    en
  • Publication status
    acceptedVersion
  • Review status
    peerReviewed
  • ISSN
    1873-7811
  • Persistent Identifier
    https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12034/17018
  • Persistent Identifier
    https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.21637
  • Language of content
    eng
  • Publisher
    PsychArchives
  • Is version of
    https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.21568
  • Is related to
    https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.21568
  • Dewey Decimal Classification number(s)
    150
  • Title
    Cognitive bias modification in alcohol use disorder and problematic drinking: A revised and updated IPD Bayesian meta-analysis
    en
  • DRO type
    article
  • Journal title
    Clinical Psychology Review
  • Visible tag(s)
    Accepted Manuscript