ArticlePsychology and psychotherapy2026
What works? A grounded theory investigation of training non-psychology staff in using Solution-Focused Brief Therapy.
Article in Psychology and psychotherapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- What works? A grounded theory investigation of training non-psychology staff in using Solution-Focused Brief Therapy.Psychology and psychotherapy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAs part of a task-sharing strategy, clinical psychologists are becoming increasingly expected to offer therapy training for staff in health care services to develop psychological mindedness to increase access and provision of psychological support for clients. The current study explored how 10 staff working in health care settings experienced Solution-Focused Brief Therapy (SFBT) training and how they subsequently used it.
methodsOne-to-one semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 participants; a constructivist grounded theory (GT) approach was used to generate a model based on the participants' reflections after the training.
resultsStaff shared how they felt they needed evidence of SFBT effectiveness in order to believe that learning a new model would be worth the required investment. They also found realistic role modelling that was relevant to their context to be particularly convincing as well as regular support from their peers and multidisciplinary meetings. Participants also shared some barriers to using SFBT in practice, including time-restricted clinics, service pressures and challenging clients.
conclusionThe model describes a complex dynamic between personal, interpersonal and systemic factors that influenced the staff members' individual decision to abandon the more familiar medical model that represented a sense of comfort and safety. The study includes recommendations for how clinical psychologists can address the identified facilitators and barriers to facilitate more effective training programmes and training transfer.
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.