Cited by 71Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsHealth Policy Implementation ScienceCounseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics

Decreasing Effect Sizes for Effectiveness Studies- Implications for the Transport of Evidence-Based Treatments: Comment on Curtis, Ronan, and Borduin (2004).

Henggeler, Scott W.·2004·Journal of Family Psychology

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

Crossref · 10.1037/0893-3200.18.3.420

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • 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).”

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