A discussion of the application of evidence-based practice (EBP) in clinical settings is offered from a practitioner's point of view. Questions are raised regarding how the EBP effectiveness client-oriented practical evidence search (COPES) questions and literature review protocol (Gibbs, 2003) guide the operationalization of problems and clients, and suggestions are offered about additional variables to include in this standardized protocol that may enhance the specificity of EBP. An exploration of the EBP collaborative decision-making process is presented from a practice perspective, and a conclusion is drawn about the use of the EBP process in clinical settings.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text revision). Washington, DC: Author.
AsayT. P., & LambertM. J. (2002). The empirical case for the common factors in therapy: Quantitative findings. In HubbleM. A. & DuncanB. L. (Eds.), Heart and soul of change: What works in therapy (pp. 23–55). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
4.
BeckJ. S. (1995). Cognitive therapy: Basics and beyond. New York: Guilford.
DuncanB., & MillerS (2005). The manual is not the territory. In NorcrossJ., LevantR., & BeutlerL. (Eds.), Evidence-based practices in mental health: Debate and dialogue on the fundamental questions (pp. 329–337). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
7.
DuncanB., MillerS., & SparksJ. (2004). The heroic client. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
8.
DuncanB., MillerS., & SparksJ. (2007). Common factors and the uncommon heroism of youth.Psychotherapy in Australia, 13(2), 34–43.
9.
FoucaultM. (1965). Madness and civilization: A history of insanity in the age of reason. New York: Vintage.
10.
FoucaultM. (1975). The birth of a clinic: An archaeology of medical perception. New York: Vintage.
11.
FoucaultM. (1979). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. New York: Pantheon.
12.
GambrillE. (1999). Evidence-based practice: An alternative to authoritybased practice.Families in Society, 80(4), 341–350.
13.
GambrillE. (2005). Critical thinking in clinical practice: Improving the quality of judgments and decisions, (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
14.
GambrillE. (2006). Social work practice: A critical thinkers guide. London: Oxford.
15.
GambrillE., & GibbsL (2002). Making practice decisions: Is what's good for the goose good for the gander?Ethical Human Sciences & Services, 4(1), 31–46.
16.
GibbsL. (1990). Using online databases to guide practice and research. Computers in Human Services, 6(1-3), 97–116.
17.
GibbsL. (2003). Evidence-based practice for the helping professions. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
18.
GibbsL., & GambrillE (2002). Evidence-based practice: Counterarguments to objections.Research on Social Work Practice, 12(3), 452–476.
19.
Hare-MustinR. (1994). Discourse in the mirrored room: A postmodern analysis of therapy.Family Process, 33, 19–35.
20.
HaynesR. B., DevereauxP. J., & GuyattG. H. (2002, March-April). Clinical expertise in the era of evidence-based medicine and patient choice. [Editorial]. ACP Journal Club, 136(A11), 1–2.
21.
IrvingA. (2006). Being is not syntactical: Ethics as intensities. Canadian Social Work Review, 23(1-2), 131–137.
22.
KargerH. J. (1983). Science, research, and social work: Who controls the profession?Social Work, 28(3), 200–205.
23.
KargerH. J. (1999). The politics of social work research.Research on Social Work Practice, 9(1), 96–99.
24.
MyersL. L., & ThyerB. A. (1997). Should social work clients have the right to effective treatment?Social Work, 42(3), 288–298.
25.
National Association of Social Workers. (1999). Code of ethics of the National Association of Social Workers. Washington, DC: Author.
26.
OrlinskyD. E., GraweK., & ParksB. K. (1994). Process and outcome in psychotherapy. In BerginA. E. & GarfieldS. L. (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (4th ed., pp. 270–378). New York: Wiley.
27.
OrlinskyD. E., RonnestadM. H., & WillutzkiU. (2003). Fifty years of process-outcome research: Continuity and change. In LambertM. J. (Ed.), Bergin and Garfield's handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (5th ed., pp. 307–390). New York: Wiley.
28.
RawS. D. (1998). Who is to define effective treatment for social work clients?Social Work, 43(1), 81–86.
29.
ThyerB. A., & MyersL. L. (1998a). Response to Raw letter: More on the empirical practice movement. Social Work, 43(5), 478–480.
30.
ThyerB. A., & MyersL. L. (1998b). Supporting the client's right to effective treatment: Touching a Raw nerve? Social Work, 43(1), 87–91.
31.
ThyerB. A., & MyersL. L. (1999). On science, antiscience, and the client's right to effective treatment.Social Work, 44(5), 501–504.
32.
WampoldB. E. (2001). The great psychotherapy debate: Models, methods, and findings. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
33.
WendtD. C., & SlifeB. D. (2007). Is evidence-based practice diverse enough? Philosophy of science considerations.American Psychologist, 62, 613–614.
34.
WitkinS. L. (1992). Should empirically-based practice be taught in BSW and MSW programs? No!Journal of Social Work Education, 28, 265–269.
35.
WitkinS. L. (1996). If empirical practice is the answer, then what is the question?Social Work Research, 20(2), 69–75.
36.
WitkinS. L. (1998). The right to effective treatment and the effective treatment of rights: Rhetorical empiricism and the politics of research.Social Work, 43(1), 75–80.
37.
WitkinS. L. (2001a). Complicating causes.Social Work, 46(3), 197–201.
38.
WitkinS. L. (2001b). The measure of things.Social Work, 46(2), 101–104.
39.
WitkinS. L., & HarrisonW. D. (2001). Whose evidence and for what purpose?Social Work, 46(4), 293–296.
40.
WoodG., & TullyC (2006). The structural approach to direct practice in social work: A social constructionist perspective. New York: Columbia.
