Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20865146›Full record

ArticlePsychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society2008

Current Status and Future Prospects of Clinical Psychology: Toward a Scientifically Principled Approach to Mental and Behavioral Health Care.

Timothy B Baker, Richard M McFall, Varda Shoham

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
25.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 334 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Advancing clinical psychology with improved doctoral training in science.Training and education in professional psychology · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Reforming clinical psychological science training: The importance of collaborative decision-making with trainees.Clinical psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2024
    Article
  12. Underfunding Basic Psychological Science Because of the Primacy of the Here and Now: A Scientific Conundrum.Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) Is Not an Improvement Over the DSM.Clinical psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. When psychological science fails to be heard: the lack of evidence-based arguments in a ministerial report on child sexual abuse.Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Timothy B BakerUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison tbb@ctri.medicine.wisc.edu.
Richard M McFallIndiana University.
Varda ShohamUniversity of Arizona.
Indiana University · USUniversity of Arizona · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

Western States Node of the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials NetworkU10DA015815 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI MCCARTY, DENNIS, SORENSEN, JAMES L · 2002 to 2015
$25.2M
Western States Node of the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (TMS for CUD) UG1DA015815 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Keith N. Humphreys, Philip Todd Korthuis · 2015 to 2026
$24.6M
Tobacco Dependence: Treatment and OutcomesP50DA019706 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI JOHNSON-POWELL, GLORIA · 2004 to 2008
$8.6M
Mediators and Moderators of BSFT for Adolescent Drug UseR01DA017539 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA · PI SHOHAM, VARDA · 2003 to 2007
$2.5M
Training in Translational Tobacco ScienceK05CA139871 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI BAKER, TIMOTHY B · 2008 to 2012
$850k
Case Simulation Methods for Teaching Empirically-Validated Behavioral TreatmentsR25DA026635 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA · PI SBARRA, DAVID A · 2008 to 2012
$157k
NCI NIH HHS K05 CA139871NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA019706NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA017539NIDA NIH HHS R25 DA026635NIDA NIH HHS U10 DA015815NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA015815
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The escalating costs of health care and other recent trends have made health care decisions of great societal import, with decision-making responsibility often being transferred from practitioners to health economists, health plans, and insurers. Health care decision making increasingly is guided by evidence that a treatment is efficacious, effective-disseminable, cost-effective, and scientifically plausible. Under these conditions of heightened cost concerns and institutional-economic decision making, psychologists are losing the opportunity to play a leadership role in mental and behavioral health care: Other types of practitioners are providing an increasing proportion of delivered treatment, and the use of psychiatric medication has increased dramatically relative to the provision of psychological interventions. Research has shown that numerous psychological interventions are efficacious, effective, and cost-effective. However, these interventions are used infrequently with patients who would benefit from them, in part because clinical psychologists have not made a convincing case for the use of these interventions (e.g., by supplying the data that decision makers need to support implementation of such interventions) and because clinical psychologists do not themselves use these interventions even when given the opportunity to do so. Clinical psychologists' failure to achieve a more significant impact on clinical and public health may be traced to their deep ambivalence about the role of science and their lack of adequate science training, which leads them to value personal clinical experience over research evidence, use assessment practices that have dubious psychometric support, and not use the interventions for which there is the strongest evidence of efficacy. Clinical psychology resembles medicine at a point in its history when practitioners were operating in a largely prescientific manner. Prior to the scientific reform of medicine in the early 1900s, physicians typically shared the attitudes of many of today's clinical psychologists, such as valuing personal experience over scientific research. Medicine was reformed, in large part, by a principled effort by the American Medical Association to increase the science base of medical school education. Substantial evidence shows that many clinical psychology doctoral training programs, especially PsyD and for-profit programs, do not uphold high standards for graduate admission, have high student-faculty ratios, deemphasize science in their training, and produce students who fail to apply or generate scientific knowledge. A promising strategy for improving the quality and clinical and public health impact of clinical psychology is through a new accreditation system that demands high-quality science training as a central feature of doctoral training in clinical psychology. Just as strengthening training standards in medicine markedly enhanced the quality of health care, improved training standards in clinical psychology will enhance health and mental health care. Such a system will (a) allow the public and employers to identify scientifically trained psychologists; (b) stigmatize ascientific training programs and practitioners; (c) produce aspirational effects, thereby enhancing training quality generally; and (d) help accredited programs improve their training in the application and generation of science. These effects should enhance the generation, application, and dissemination of experimentally supported interventions, thereby improving clinical and public health. Experimentally based treatments not only are highly effective but also are cost-effective relative to other interventions; therefore, they could help control spiraling health care costs. The new Psychological Clinical Science Accreditation System (PCSAS) is intended to accredit clinical psychology training programs that offer high-quality science-centered education and training, producing graduates who are successful in generating and applying scientific knowledge. Psychologists, universities, and other stakeholders should vigorously support this new accreditation system as the surest route to a scientifically principled clinical psychology that can powerfully benefit clinical and public health.

Identifiers

PMID20865146
PMCPMC2943397
OpenAlexW2075805031

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.