Endre søk
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
How Much Therapy Is Enough? Comparing Dose-Effect and Good-Enough Models in Two Different Settings
Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för beteendevetenskap och lärande, Psykologi. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten. Uppsala University, Sweden.
Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för beteendevetenskap och lärande. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten.
Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för beteendevetenskap och lärande. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten.
Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för beteendevetenskap och lärande, Psykologi. Linköpings universitet, Filosofiska fakulteten.
2016 (engelsk)Inngår i: Psychotherapy, ISSN 0033-3204, E-ISSN 1939-1536, Vol. 53, nr 1, s. 130-139Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert) Published
Resurstyp
Text
Abstract [en]

The Dose-Effect model holds that longer therapy leads to better outcome, although increasing treatment length will yield diminishing returns, as additional sessions lead to progressively less change in a negatively accelerating fashion. In contrast, the Good-Enough-Level (GEL) model proposes that patients, therapists, or patients-with-therapists decide on ending treatment when treatment outcome is satisfactory, meaning that patients who change faster will have shorter treatments. If true, this means that aggregating among patients with different treatment lengths would yield biased results. Most previous research has shown that symptom change rate depends on treatment length, but all of these studies used data from University counseling centers in the United States. There is a need to test if previous results hold in different settings. Two datasets from Swedish community-based primary care (n = 640) and psychiatric care (n = 284) were used. Patients made session-wise ratings on the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation-Outcome Measure (CORE-OM). Multilevel models indicated better fit for a model in which treatment length moderated symptom change rate. In the primary care sample, patients in longer treatments achieved more symptom change from pre- to posttreatment, despite having slower rate of improvement. The most important aspect of the GEL model was supported, and no evidence was found for a negatively accelerating Dose-Effect curve. Results cannot be generalized beyond about 12 sessions, due to scarcity of data for longer treatments.

sted, utgiver, år, opplag, sider
AMER PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC, DIV PSYCHOTHERAPY , 2016. Vol. 53, nr 1, s. 130-139
Emneord [en]
psychotherapy; naturalistic research; outcome research; GEL model; Dose-Effect
HSV kategori
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-126834DOI: 10.1037/pst0000039ISI: 000371345200013PubMedID: 26928273OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-126834DiVA, id: diva2:917649
Tilgjengelig fra: 2016-04-07 Laget: 2016-04-05 Sist oppdatert: 2018-01-10

Open Access i DiVA

Fulltekst mangler i DiVA

Andre lenker

Forlagets fulltekstPubMed

Søk i DiVA

Av forfatter/redaktør
Falkenström, FredrikHolmqvist, Rolf
Av organisasjonen
I samme tidsskrift
Psychotherapy

Søk utenfor DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Totalt: 220 treff
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf