Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Behavior Modification
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Follette, W. C.
Right arrow Articles by Beitz, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Follette, W. C.
Right arrow Articles by Beitz, K.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Adding a more Rigorous Scientific Agenda to the Empirically Supported Treatment Movement

William C. Follette

Kendra Beitz

University of Nevada, Reno

As the empirically supported treatment (EST) effort has expanded, there are efforts to make the study of ESTs a more integral part of training programs. In its present form, the EST list provides a poor model of how to evaluate treatment and scientific issues related to our field. This article offers several suggestions regarding how to establish a more relevant scientific agenda for the committee's work if the study of ESTs is to usefully influence training programs. Recommendations are made to encourage programs and the CSP to study mechanisms of change, important contextual variables for therapy delivery, the distinction between statistical significance and clinical meaningfulness, dissemination, cost-effectiveness, and iatrogenic effects. It is argued that any program that created a curriculum educating students to thoughtfully address these issues when evaluating therapies would be producing sound clinical scientists regardless of the quality of the EST list itself.

Key Words: empirically supported treatments • EST • critique • training • Committee on Science and Practice • CSP

Behavior Modification, Vol. 27, No. 3, 369-386 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/0145445503027003006
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Research on Social Work PracticeHome page
E. Gambrill
Book Reviews: Norcross, J. C., Beutler, L. E., & Levant, R. F. (Eds.). (2005). Evidence-Based Practices in Mental Health: Debate and Dialogue on the Fundamental Questions. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, ISBN 1-59147-310-1
Research on Social Work Practice, May 1, 2007; 17(3): 428 - 434.
[PDF]

Home page
 LSHSSHome page
N. B. Ratner
Evidence-Based Practice: An Examination of Its Ramifications for the Practice of Speech-Language Pathology
Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch, October 1, 2006; 37(4): 257 - 267.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Psychiatr. Serv.Home page
J. L. Skeem and J. E. Louden
Toward Evidence-Based Practice for Probationers and Parolees Mandated to Mental Health Treatment
Psychiatr Serv, March 1, 2006; 57(3): 333 - 342.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]