ArticleJournal of clinical psychology2025
Therapist's Assessment of Their Patient's Session-Level Emotional Processes: Validation of the In-Session Patient Affective Reactions Questionnaire-Clinician Form.
Article in Journal of clinical psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Transference Assessment in Psychotherapy: A Systematic Review.Clinical psychology & psychotherapyPooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe current study aimed to evaluate a therapist version of the in-Session Patient Affective Reactions Questionnaire (SPARQ). The SPARQ was developed to assess a pattern of emotions, thoughts, and behaviors experienced by a patient toward their therapist during a session. The SPARQ has existed only as a patient self-report measure and has demonstrated promise as a psychotherapy process measure. This study intended to validate a complementary clinician-report version of the questionnaire: the SPARQ-C.
methodsA sample of licensed mental health clinicians (N = 151) completed the SPARQ-C along with other measures. Data analysis involved exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA). Reliability and convergent and criterion-related validity of the SPARQ-C were also evaluated.
resultsThe SPARQ-C preserved the two-factor structure: positive affect (k = 4, ω total = 0.84) and negative affect (k = 4, ω total = 0.70), which correlated r = 0.26. CFA using the a priori model two-factor model based on the patient-report version provided the following fit indices: χ DISCUSSION: The SPARQ-C is a reliable measure suitable for both clinical and research purposes. It allows for a nuanced assessment of patients' session-level affective responses towards their therapist from the clinician's perspective.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.