Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Adm Policy Ment Health ; 51(3): 380-383, 2024 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38598077

RESUMO

At the centre of POR is the concept of collaboration between patients, therapists, agencies, and third-party payers. For this commentary, I review the articles of the special issue with attention to both the opportunities and challenges offered by practice-oriented research (POR). I also reviewed some previous research on practice-research networks and how that research might inform POR. The use of routine outcome monitoring (ROM), artificial intelligence (AI), and program evaluation (PE) models show promise for advancing POR. However, each comes with its challenges. The use of ROM to improve patient outcomes has research support. However, researchers have identified problems with implementing ROM because of low uptake by clinicians and because clinicians may see ROM as a potential intrusion. AI shows promise to improve patient outcomes by potentially providing therapists with immediate and nuanced data to inform interventions and interpersonal stances specific to each patient. However, the scaling up of AI runs the risk of dehumanizing psychological interventions. PE may provide a context for allowing therapists to engage in POR to address real-world processes and outcomes of mental health interventions. However, like ROM PE faces the challenge of trust among clinicians and patients who may be reluctant to participate. Despite these challenges, and because of efforts to nurture and maintain respectful collaborations, articles in this special issue highlight how POR can play a pivotal role in bridging the gap between theory and practice.


Assuntos
Inteligência Artificial , Humanos , Pesquisa sobre Serviços de Saúde/organização & administração , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde
2.
Behav Ther ; 45(1): 3-6, 2014 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24411109

RESUMO

This article addresses the long-standing gap that has existed between psychotherapy research and practice and the efforts that have been made to bridge it. It also introduces one such effort, which has consisted of 3 clinical surveys on the experiences of practitioners in using empirically supported treatments for panic disorder, social anxiety, and OCD. In contrast to attempts to close the gap by disseminating research findings to the clinician, the clinical surveys are intended to allow for practitioners to disseminate their clinical experiences to the researcher-and also to other clinicians. What we view as a "two-way bridge" initiative is a collaboration between the Society of Clinical Psychology, Division 12 of the APA, and the Psychotherapy Division of the APA-Division 29. The mechanism that has been established provides a way for clinicians to be a part of the research process, which we hope will provide evidence that can help to enhance our clinical effectiveness.


Assuntos
Prática Clínica Baseada em Evidências , Disseminação de Informação , Transtornos Mentais/terapia , Pesquisa , Humanos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA