Decreasing Effect Sizes for Effectiveness Studies- Implications for the Transport of Evidence-Based Treatments: Comment on Curtis, Ronan, and Borduin (2004).
Abstract
The most important finding from the N. M. Curtis, K. R. Ronan, and C. M. Borduin (2004) meta-analysis for the broader field is likely the difference in effect sizes between multisys- multisystemic therapy efficacy versus effectiveness studies. This difference has important implications for research on the transport of evidence-based treatments to community practice settings. For example, factors rarely considered in efficacy research (e.g., funding structures, organizational climate, program maturity, site characteristics) are emerging as important determinants of treatment fidelity and, in turn, clinical outcomes for practice in real-world settings. Current research is clearly demonstrating that evidence-based practices can be successfully transported, but much remains to be learned regarding the optimal parameters of such transport.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Effectiveness studies of psychological interventions typically show some decreases in intervention potency when treatments move from research to community settings.
“In line with this, effectiveness studies of psychological interventions do typically show some decreases in intervention potency when a treatment is translated from research settings into the community (Curtis et al. 2004; Henggeler 2004; Miller 2005).”
From The Effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) in Real-World Healthcare Services (2020) · cites this paper as Henggeler 2004
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 14 · Cited by 71
- Authors
- Henggeler, S. W.
- Affiliations
- Medical University of South Carolina (US)
- Corresponding author
- Henggeler, Scott W.
- Venue
- Journal of Family Psychology
- Published
- 2004
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 420-423
- ISSN
- 0893-3200 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1293
- OpenAlex
- W2004064489
- Cited by
- 71
- References
- 14
- Citations by year
- 2023: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 5.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Family Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (5r01da010079-05)
- National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (AA122202)
- National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH065414, MH65414)
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA10079, DA17487, R01DA017487, DA015844, R01DA015844)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Counseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
- Keywords
- multisystemic therapy, evidence-based treatment, treatment effectiveness, treatment efficacy, effect size, intervention fidelity, organizational climate, program maturity
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Mental Disorders, Child, Combined Modality Therapy, Community Mental Health Centers, Family Therapy, Hospitalization, Hospitals, Psychiatric, Humans, Juvenile Delinquency, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Substance Abuse Treatment Centers, Treatment Outcome, Evidence-Based Medicine, Substance-Related Disorders
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