20
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      What Research Evidence Is Valid for Psychotherapy Research?

      brief-report

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) have contributed to improved clinical practice with increased use of effective and life-saving treatments for severe diseases. However, the EBM model is less suitable for psychotherapy research than for pharmacological research and somatic medicine. The randomized controlled trial (RCT) design is an example of experimental methodology, which inevitably has more imperfections in psychotherapy research because psychotherapy RCTs cannot use double-blinding and the treatments tested are composite treatment packages. Long-term psychotherapy for severe and complex mental disorders is especially difficult to study with an RCT design. During the last decades, advanced analytic methods have been developed in psychotherapy process research, which enables investigation of causal connections regarding change mechanisms in psychotherapy. Therefore, we propose that the top of the research evidence hierarchy for psychotherapy should encompass: (1) RCT for circumscribed disorders, (2) cohort studies for complex disorders, and (3) advanced process studies for change mechanisms.

          Related collections

          Most cited references40

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.

          Users of clinical practice guidelines and other recommendations need to know how much confidence they can place in the recommendations. Systematic and explicit methods of making judgments can reduce errors and improve communication. We have developed a system for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations that can be applied across a wide range of interventions and contexts. In this article we present a summary of our approach from the perspective of a guideline user. Judgments about the strength of a recommendation require consideration of the balance between benefits and harms, the quality of the evidence, translation of the evidence into specific circumstances, and the certainty of the baseline risk. It is also important to consider costs (resource utilisation) before making a recommendation. Inconsistencies among systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations reduce their potential to facilitate critical appraisal and improve communication of these judgments. Our system for guiding these complex judgments balances the need for simplicity with the need for full and transparent consideration of all important issues.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Psychiatry
                Front Psychiatry
                Front. Psychiatry
                Frontiers in Psychiatry
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-0640
                11 January 2021
                2020
                : 11
                : 625380
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Department of Psychology, Stockholm University , Stockholm, Sweden
                [2] 2Department of Behavioral Sciences and Learning, Linköping University , Linköping, Sweden
                Author notes

                Edited by: Asle Hoffart, Modum Bad Psychiatric Center, Norway

                Reviewed by: Warren Mansell, The University of Manchester, United Kingdom; Janardhan YC Reddy, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (NIMHANS), India

                *Correspondence: Björn Philips bjorn.philips@ 123456psychology.su.se

                This article was submitted to Psychological Therapies, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychiatry

                Article
                10.3389/fpsyt.2020.625380
                7829194
                33505325
                795c1fd0-a05b-4c52-984f-02c218cf02c7
                Copyright © 2021 Philips and Falkenström.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 02 November 2020
                : 09 December 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 40, Pages: 6, Words: 4546
                Categories
                Psychiatry
                Perspective

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                evidence,psychotherapy,evidence—based medicine,randomized controlled trial,process research,experimental methodology,causality,research design

                Comments

                Comment on this article