Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38356898›Full record

ArticleClinical psychology in Europe2023

Research Into Evidence-Based Psychological Interventions Needs a Stronger Focus on Replicability.

Helen Niemeyer, Christine Knaevelsrud, Robbie C M van Aert, Thomas Ehring

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical psychology in Europe, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Helen NiemeyerDepartment of Clinical Psychological Intervention, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7616-1885
Christine KnaevelsrudDepartment of Clinical Psychological Intervention, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1342-7006
Robbie C M van AertDepartment of Methodology and Statistics, Tilburg University, Tilburg, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6187-0665
Thomas EhringDepartment of Psychology, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9502-6868

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: It is a precondition for evidence-based practice that research is replicable in a wide variety of clinical settings. Current standards for identifying evidence-based psychological interventions and making recommendations for clinical practice in clinical guidelines include criteria that are relevant for replicability, but a better understanding as well refined definitions of replicability are needed enabling empirical research on this topic. Recent advances on this issue were made in the wider field of psychology and in other disciplines, which offers the opportunity to define and potentially increase replicability also in research on psychological interventions. Method: This article proposes a research strategy for assessing, understanding, and improving replicability in research on psychological interventions. Results/Conclusion: First, we establish a replication taxonomy ranging from direct to conceptual replication adapted to the field of research on clinical interventions, propose study characteristics that increase the trustworthiness of results, and define statistical criteria for successful replication with respect to the quantitative outcomes of the original and replication studies. Second, we propose how to establish such standards for future research, i.e., in order to design future replication studies for psychological interventions as well as to apply them when investigating which factors are causing the (non-)replicability of findings in the current literature.

Indexed as

criteria developmentevidence-based interventionsreplicability

Identifiers

PMID38356898
PMCPMC10863633

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.