测试背景下的社会心理干预:对 Beidas 等人(2023 年)的评论。

IF 4.5 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Kenneth E Freedland, Lynda H Powell, Susan M Czajkowski, Leonard H Epstein
{"title":"测试背景下的社会心理干预:对 Beidas 等人(2023 年)的评论。","authors":"Kenneth E Freedland, Lynda H Powell, Susan M Czajkowski, Leonard H Epstein","doi":"10.1037/ccp0000877","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In their recent Viewpoint article, Beidas et al. (2023) argue that researchers should test psychosocial interventions in the contexts in which they are meant to be delivered and that they can accelerate the deployment of these interventions by advancing directly from pilot trials to effectiveness and implementation studies without conducting efficacy trials. In this commentary, we argue that this is a well-intended but problematic approach and that there is a more productive strategy for translational behavioral intervention research. The commentary discusses issues concerning intervention development, refinement, and optimization; pilot and efficacy testing of interventions; the contexts in which interventions are delivered; clinical practice guidelines; and quick versus programmatic answers to significant clinical research questions. Testing psychosocial interventions in the contexts in which they are meant to be delivered is a complex task for interventions that are designed to be used in a wide variety of contexts. Nevertheless, interventions can be tested in the contexts in which they are meant to be delivered without sacrificing programmatic intervention development or safety and efficacy testing. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15447,"journal":{"name":"Journal of consulting and clinical psychology","volume":"92 5","pages":"320-323"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Testing psychosocial interventions in context: Commentary on Beidas et al. (2023).\",\"authors\":\"Kenneth E Freedland, Lynda H Powell, Susan M Czajkowski, Leonard H Epstein\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/ccp0000877\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In their recent Viewpoint article, Beidas et al. (2023) argue that researchers should test psychosocial interventions in the contexts in which they are meant to be delivered and that they can accelerate the deployment of these interventions by advancing directly from pilot trials to effectiveness and implementation studies without conducting efficacy trials. In this commentary, we argue that this is a well-intended but problematic approach and that there is a more productive strategy for translational behavioral intervention research. The commentary discusses issues concerning intervention development, refinement, and optimization; pilot and efficacy testing of interventions; the contexts in which interventions are delivered; clinical practice guidelines; and quick versus programmatic answers to significant clinical research questions. Testing psychosocial interventions in the contexts in which they are meant to be delivered is a complex task for interventions that are designed to be used in a wide variety of contexts. Nevertheless, interventions can be tested in the contexts in which they are meant to be delivered without sacrificing programmatic intervention development or safety and efficacy testing. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15447,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of consulting and clinical psychology\",\"volume\":\"92 5\",\"pages\":\"320-323\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"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/ccp0000877\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of consulting and clinical psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000877","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

摘要

Beidas等人(2023年)在最近发表的《观点》文章中认为,研究人员应该在社会心理干预措施的实施环境中对其进行测试,他们可以不进行疗效试验,直接从试点试验推进到有效性和实施研究,从而加快这些干预措施的部署。在这篇评论中,我们认为这种方法的初衷是好的,但却存在问题,还有一种更有成效的转化行为干预研究策略。本评论讨论了有关干预措施的开发、改进和优化;干预措施的试验和疗效测试;实施干预措施的环境;临床实践指南;以及对重大临床研究问题的快速回答与方案回答等问题。对于设计用于各种环境的干预措施来说,在干预措施的实施环境中测试社会心理干预措施是一项复杂的任务。尽管如此,在不影响干预项目开发或安全性和有效性测试的前提下,可以在干预措施的实施环境中对其进行测试。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Testing psychosocial interventions in context: Commentary on Beidas et al. (2023).

In their recent Viewpoint article, Beidas et al. (2023) argue that researchers should test psychosocial interventions in the contexts in which they are meant to be delivered and that they can accelerate the deployment of these interventions by advancing directly from pilot trials to effectiveness and implementation studies without conducting efficacy trials. In this commentary, we argue that this is a well-intended but problematic approach and that there is a more productive strategy for translational behavioral intervention research. The commentary discusses issues concerning intervention development, refinement, and optimization; pilot and efficacy testing of interventions; the contexts in which interventions are delivered; clinical practice guidelines; and quick versus programmatic answers to significant clinical research questions. Testing psychosocial interventions in the contexts in which they are meant to be delivered is a complex task for interventions that are designed to be used in a wide variety of contexts. Nevertheless, interventions can be tested in the contexts in which they are meant to be delivered without sacrificing programmatic intervention development or safety and efficacy testing. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
3.40%
发文量
94
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.
×
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