Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T18:06:07.409Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Empirically Validated Treatments: Health Psychology Interventions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 October 2014

Jack E. James
Jack E. James*
Affiliation:
La Trobe University
*
School of Behavioural Health Sciences, La Trobe University, Melbourne VIC 3083, Australia. Tel: (03) 9479 1736, Fax: (03) 9479 1783. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Extract

Whereas King's (1977) focus was clinical psychology, the present commentary considers empirical validation of psychological practice in health settings. Comparisons are made with the fact that most diagnostic and therapeutic medical practices in use have yet to be empirically validated. At the population level, modern medicine does not appear to have had a large impact on any of the major causes of premature death, past or present. Conversely, there is strong evidence that all current major causes of death are closely related to behaviour pattern. However, there are formidable obstacles to the uptake and future development of behavioural interventions in health settings. Issues subsumed under the rubric of quality of care are particularly important, including appropriateness (treatment should not be applied when it is not needed — avoidance of overservicing), and necessity (treatment should be available to persons in need — avoidance of underservicing). The general public, health practitioners, and health policy makers are relatively uninformed about relevant psychological practices and about the central role of psychological processes in all aspects of human health.

Type
Special Issue: Empirically Validated Treatments
Information
Behaviour Change , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , March 1997 , pp. 6 - 8
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Dubinsky, M., & Ferguson, J.H. (1990). Analysis of the National Institutes of Health Medicare Coverage Assessment. International Journal of Technological Assessment in Health Care, 6, 480–488.Google Scholar
Ellis, J., Mulligan, I., Rowe, J., & Sackett, D.L. (1995). Inpatient general medicine is evidence based. Lancet, 346, 407–410.Google Scholar
James, J.E. (1994a). Foundation education as a means by which to disseminate innovation to non-psychologists. Behaviour Change, 11, 19–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, J.E. (1994b). Health care, psychology, and the scientist–practitioner model. Australian Psychologist, 29, 5–11.Google Scholar
Kahan, J.P., Bernstein, S.J., Leape, L.L., Hilborne, L.H., Park, R.E., Parker, L., Kamberg, C.J., & Brook, R.H. (1994). Measuring the necessity of medical procedures. Medical Care, 32, 357–365.Google Scholar
Kaplan, R.M. (1990). Behavior as the central outcome in health care. American Psychologist, 45, 1211–1220.Google Scholar
Kassirer, J. (1993). The quality of care and the quality of measuring it. New England Journal of Medicine, 329, 1263–1265.Google Scholar
King, N.J. (1997). Empirically validated treatments and AACBT. Behaviour Change, 14, 2–5.Google Scholar
Phelps, C.E. (1993). The methodologic foundations of studies of appropriateness of medical care. New England Journal of Medicine, 329, 1241–1245.Google Scholar
Williamson, J.W., Goldschmidt, P.G., & Jillson, I.A. (1979). Medical Practice Information Demonstration Project: Final report. Baltimore, MD: Policy Research.Google Scholar