心理学
机制(生物学)
心理治疗师
结果(博弈论)
荟萃分析
临床心理学
联想(心理学)
调解人
医学
数学
认识论
内科学
哲学
数理经济学
作者
Pim Cuijpers,Mirjam Reijnders,Marcus J. H. Huibers
标识
DOI:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050718-095424
摘要
Psychotherapies may work through techniques that are specific to each therapy or through factors that all therapies have in common. Proponents of the common factors model often point to meta-analyses of comparative outcome studies that show all therapies have comparable effects. However, not all meta-analyses support the common factors model; the included studies often have several methodological problems; and there are alternative explanations for finding comparable outcomes. To date, research on the working mechanisms and mediators of therapies has always been correlational, and in order to establish that a mediator is indeed a causal factor in the recovery process of a patient, studies must show a temporal relationship between the mediator and an outcome, a dose–response association, evidence that no third variable causes changes in the mediator and the outcome, supportive experimental research, and have a strong theoretical framework. Currently, no common or specific factor meets these criteria and can be considered an empirically validated working mechanism. Therefore, it is still unknown whether therapies work through common or specific factors, or both.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI