Cited by 7,770Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPsychometric Methodologies and TestingMeta-analysis and systematic reviews

Clinical significance: A statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research.

Jacobson, Neil S., Truax, Paula·1991·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-006x.59.1.12

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A change of 6.39 points on the Y-BOCS was considered reliable.

    “A change of 6.39 on the Y-BOCS was considered reliable.”
  • The WHODAS-II is a 12-item self-report measure with evidence of reliability and validity for assessing psychosocial and physical disability.

    “The brief version of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS-II) 47,48 is a 12-item self-report measure that has evidence of reliability and validity for assessing various aspects of psychosocial and physical disability.”
  • The reliable change index (RCI) was used to index clinically significant change in distress tolerance.

    “we examined if the changes in distress tolerance were clinically significant (as indexed by the reliable change index (RCI; Jacobson and Truax, 1991)).”

    From Initial RCT of a distress tolerance treatment for individuals with substance use disorders (2012) · cites this paper as Jacobson and Truax, 1991

  • Formative indicators of working memory, inhibitory control, and set shifting were derived, and participant-level component scores were analyzed with reliable change analyses that explicitly account for measurement error to objectively define impairment.

    “Formative indicators of working memory, inhibitory control, and set shifting were derived, and these participant-level component scores were subjected to reliable change analyses (Jacobson & Truax, 1991) that explicitly account for measurement error to objectively define impairment (Kofler et al., 2016; Sarver et al., 2015).”

    From Executive Functioning Heterogeneity in Pediatric ADHD (2019) · cites this paper as Jacobson & Truax, 1991

  • The study defined clinical significance at post-intervention with the recommended reliable change index and cut-off points.

    “Clinical significance at post-intervention was operationalized by the recommended reliable change index and cut-off points (Jacobson and Truax 1991; Vollestad et la. 2011)”

Cites

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jacobson, N. S., & Truax, P.
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Published
1991
Volume
59
Issue
1
Pages
12-19
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
OpenAlex
W4235813114
Cited by
7,770
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 323 · 2025: 310 · 2024: 326 · 2023: 363 · 2022: 411 · 2021: 472 · 2020: 484 · 2019: 457 · 2018: 452 · 2017: 395 · 2016: 385 · 2015: 399 · 2014: 373 · 2013: 350 · 2012: 304
FWCI
20.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Keywords
meaningful change, clinical significance, psychotherapy outcome assessment, statistical significance, effect size

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review