Revived call for consensus in the future of psychotherapy.

IF 6.6 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Averi N Gaines, Marvin R Goldfried, Michael J Constantino
{"title":"Revived call for consensus in the future of psychotherapy.","authors":"Averi N Gaines,&nbsp;Marvin R Goldfried,&nbsp;Michael J Constantino","doi":"10.1136/ebmental-2020-300208","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The emblem of success in psychotherapy research and practice has long been innovation. Although such ingenuity is commendable, it has nonetheless perpetuated fragmentation across the field. At least four decades ago, it was suggested that achieving consensus on what constitutes psychotherapy's theoretical, empirical, and practical 'core' might allow the discipline to evolve beyond its siloed state, as is reflective of mature science. Yet, division remains the rule versus exception, owing in large part to power struggles among disparate schools of therapy and quarrels over whether theory-specific or theory-common factors most account for therapeutic change. We outline here a vision for psychotherapy's future that is defined by consensus rather than disintegration. Namely, we reiterate the need for the field to invest in clinical strategies that transcend ostensibly incompatible theoretical models. We also argue that psychotherapy research should build on the growing evidence for such clinical strategies in an effort to establish core, evidence-based principles of therapeutic change. We then discuss how establishing consensus will require reconciliation among the mounting evidence for flexible, principle-informed practice with the current realities of training, dissemination, and implementation paradigms. Finally, we articulate ways in which practicing clinicians will serve a vital role in carrying out, and amending as needed, actionable efforts toward psychotherapy consensus.</p>","PeriodicalId":12233,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Mental Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/ebmental-2020-300208","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence Based Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmental-2020-300208","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

The emblem of success in psychotherapy research and practice has long been innovation. Although such ingenuity is commendable, it has nonetheless perpetuated fragmentation across the field. At least four decades ago, it was suggested that achieving consensus on what constitutes psychotherapy's theoretical, empirical, and practical 'core' might allow the discipline to evolve beyond its siloed state, as is reflective of mature science. Yet, division remains the rule versus exception, owing in large part to power struggles among disparate schools of therapy and quarrels over whether theory-specific or theory-common factors most account for therapeutic change. We outline here a vision for psychotherapy's future that is defined by consensus rather than disintegration. Namely, we reiterate the need for the field to invest in clinical strategies that transcend ostensibly incompatible theoretical models. We also argue that psychotherapy research should build on the growing evidence for such clinical strategies in an effort to establish core, evidence-based principles of therapeutic change. We then discuss how establishing consensus will require reconciliation among the mounting evidence for flexible, principle-informed practice with the current realities of training, dissemination, and implementation paradigms. Finally, we articulate ways in which practicing clinicians will serve a vital role in carrying out, and amending as needed, actionable efforts toward psychotherapy consensus.

重新唤起对未来心理治疗共识的呼吁。
长期以来,心理治疗研究和实践成功的标志就是创新。尽管这种独创性是值得称赞的,但它仍然使整个领域的分裂永久化。至少在四十年前,就有人提出,就心理治疗的理论、经验和实践“核心”的构成达成共识,可能会让这门学科超越其孤立的状态,这是成熟科学的反映。然而,分歧仍然是规则与例外,这在很大程度上是由于不同治疗学派之间的权力斗争,以及关于究竟是理论特异性因素还是理论共性因素最能解释治疗变化的争论。我们在这里概述了心理治疗的未来,这是由共识而不是分裂来定义的。也就是说,我们重申该领域需要投资于超越表面上不相容的理论模型的临床策略。我们还认为,心理治疗研究应该建立在越来越多的临床策略证据的基础上,努力建立治疗改变的核心、循证原则。然后,我们讨论了建立共识如何需要将越来越多的证据与当前培训、传播和实施范例的现实情况进行协调,以实现灵活的、有原则的实践。最后,我们阐明了实践临床医生将在执行和修改必要的心理治疗共识方面发挥重要作用的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
18.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Evidence-Based Mental Health alerts clinicians to important advances in treatment, diagnosis, aetiology, prognosis, continuing education, economic evaluation and qualitative research in mental health. Published by the British Psychological Society, the Royal College of Psychiatrists and the BMJ Publishing Group the journal surveys a wide range of international medical journals applying strict criteria for the quality and validity of research. Clinicians assess the relevance of the best studies and the key details of these essential studies are presented in a succinct, informative abstract with an expert commentary on its clinical application.Evidence-Based Mental Health is a multidisciplinary, quarterly publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信