Jami F Young, Denise E Wilfley, Marian Tanofsky-Kraff, Laura Mufson
{"title":"Considerations in selecting comparison conditions in psychotherapy trials: Recommendations for future research.","authors":"Jami F Young, Denise E Wilfley, Marian Tanofsky-Kraff, Laura Mufson","doi":"10.1037/ccp0000933","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>In this commentary, we outline conceptual and methodological concerns we have with a recent randomized trial of two group-delivered transdiagnostic eating disorder treatments (Stice et al., 2023), particularly regarding the description, implementation, and labeling of the comparison condition.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We discuss the selection of a control condition in comparative psychotherapy trials; the distinction between adaptations and other types of intervention modifications; the need for processes to ensure that an intervention is developmentally and diagnostically appropriate; and the provision of detailed descriptions of interventions in articles and supplementary materials, as well as making manuals publicly available, to ensure that reviewers and readers can understand the interventions delivered and can accurately interpret the results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We highlight the potential downstream implications of mislabeling an intervention and conclude that the comparison condition in Stice et al.'s (2023) article should be reclassified to avoid misinterpretation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There are published frameworks and guidelines available that promote more detail, precision, and transparency about interventions being tested in clinical trials. We believe it is time for journals to implement these guidelines to ensure that reviewers and readers can fully understand what interventions were tested to draw informed conclusions from the study, replicate research findings, and reliably deliver these interventions in clinical practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15447,"journal":{"name":"Journal of consulting and clinical psychology","volume":"93 5","pages":"390-395"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of consulting and clinical psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000933","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: In this commentary, we outline conceptual and methodological concerns we have with a recent randomized trial of two group-delivered transdiagnostic eating disorder treatments (Stice et al., 2023), particularly regarding the description, implementation, and labeling of the comparison condition.
Method: We discuss the selection of a control condition in comparative psychotherapy trials; the distinction between adaptations and other types of intervention modifications; the need for processes to ensure that an intervention is developmentally and diagnostically appropriate; and the provision of detailed descriptions of interventions in articles and supplementary materials, as well as making manuals publicly available, to ensure that reviewers and readers can understand the interventions delivered and can accurately interpret the results.
Results: We highlight the potential downstream implications of mislabeling an intervention and conclude that the comparison condition in Stice et al.'s (2023) article should be reclassified to avoid misinterpretation.
Conclusions: There are published frameworks and guidelines available that promote more detail, precision, and transparency about interventions being tested in clinical trials. We believe it is time for journals to implement these guidelines to ensure that reviewers and readers can fully understand what interventions were tested to draw informed conclusions from the study, replicate research findings, and reliably deliver these interventions in clinical practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology® (JCCP) publishes original contributions on the following topics: the development, validity, and use of techniques of diagnosis and treatment of disordered behaviorstudies of a variety of populations that have clinical interest, including but not limited to medical patients, ethnic minorities, persons with serious mental illness, and community samplesstudies that have a cross-cultural or demographic focus and are of interest for treating behavior disordersstudies of personality and of its assessment and development where these have a clear bearing on problems of clinical dysfunction and treatmentstudies of gender, ethnicity, or sexual orientation that have a clear bearing on diagnosis, assessment, and treatmentstudies of psychosocial aspects of health behaviors. Studies that focus on populations that fall anywhere within the lifespan are considered. JCCP welcomes submissions on treatment and prevention in all areas of clinical and clinical–health psychology and especially on topics that appeal to a broad clinical–scientist and practitioner audience. JCCP encourages the submission of theory–based interventions, studies that investigate mechanisms of change, and studies of the effectiveness of treatments in real-world settings. JCCP recommends that authors of clinical trials pre-register their studies with an appropriate clinical trial registry (e.g., ClinicalTrials.gov, ClinicalTrialsRegister.eu) though both registered and unregistered trials will continue to be considered at this time.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
