Ires Ghielen

101 Meta-analyses on psychotherapies in MS and PD • Outcome: availability of questionnaires that measure anxiety and/or depressive symptoms, or general mental health. These data should allow the calculation of standardized mean differences (post-treatment means, standard deviations, and number of participants; or other statistics that allowed to calculate effect sizes). The study abstract or manuscript should be available in English or Dutch. Data extraction All decisions on the inclusion of outcome measures for psychological distress, including depressive and anxiety symptoms, or/and general mental health outcome measures, were based on consensus between two researchers (IG, SR). Outcome measures of psychological distress were extracted by these two researchers, independently. Post-treatment measurements were collected to examine the immediate effect of the interventions. When data were not available, the study researchers were contacted. In addition, two independent researchers (RB, MH) rated the type of interventions (CBT or MBT) investigated in the studies, based on the treatment components described in the manuscript. Quality assessment The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed with seven criteria of the risk of bias assessment tool, developed by Cochrane [24] to assess sources of bias in RCTs: 1. Random sequence generation (selection bias) 2. Allocation concealment (selection bias) 3. Blinding of participants and researchers (performance bias) 4. Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 5. Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 6. Selective reporting (reporting bias) 7. Other bias When questionable or unclear risk of bias was found, this was considered a risk of bias. Again, quality assessment was performed by two independent researchers (IG, SR). Meta-analyses The Hedges’ g effect sizes were calculated for each study and pooled with Comprehensive Meta-analysis (CMA; version 3 for Windows). Post-treatment means 6