Abstract
Psychosocial interventions have advanced remarkably for the treatment of a broad range of psychiatric disorders and related sources of impairment among children, adolescents, and adults. By one count, over 320 interventions have been identified as evidence-based in light of rigorously controlled studies and replication of treatment effects. Yet, how evidence-based psychotherapies have been evaluated and reported raises questions about their impact. This article evaluates both methodological and substantive issues that limit what can be stated about evidence-based psychotherapies and their effects. Among the methodological topics are the control conditions to which evidence-based psychotherapies are compared, selective reporting of measures, and the limited evidence that evidence-based psychotherapies have clinically significant impact. Among the substantive issues are the paucity of research on moderators that would help us better direct patients to treatments from which they are likely to profit and our limited understanding of the mechanisms responsible for therapeutic change. The issues discussed are fundamental to what can be stated about the impact of evidence-based psychotherapies and impact and the bases for their effects. It is not clear at present whether concerted efforts are in place to alter research in ways that would redress the issues. There are, however, novel new directions for research that build on the evidence-based psychotherapies, and these are addressed in a companion article.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
