Implementing evidence-based treatment protocols: flexibility within fidelity
Open accessAbstract
. We describe the benefits of using protocols, including their empirical support, guidance for decision making, and structure to facilitate training and enhance treatment integrity. We also address several criticisms that have been offered against protocols, citing data that indicates that many of the criticisms are not warranted.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Using standardised protocols in research has benefits (Kendall and Frank, 2018).
“This is precisely one of the benefits of using standardised protocols in research (Kendall and Frank, 2018).”
From Long-term effectiveness of the Mindful Self-Compassion programme compared to a Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction intervention: a quasi-randomised controlled trial involving regular mindfulness practice for 1 year (2025) · cites this paper as Kendall and Frank, 2018
The Abstract and the ‘Strengths of Evidence-Based Protocols’ sections describe benefits of written treatment protocols, including empirical support, reliable training, and treatment integrity. They focus on implementing treatments, however, rather than specifically establishing benefits of using standardised protocols in research; the citing sentence’s reference to ‘this’ does not identify which benefit it means. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 75 · Cited by 132
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Hollon SD Beck AT 2013 Cognitive and cognitive-behavioral therapies Lambert MJ Bergin and Garfield’s handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change 6 393 432 Majwah, NJ Wiley
- Authors
- Kendall, P. C., & Frank, H. E.
- Affiliations
- Temple University (US)
- Venue
- Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice
- Published
- 2018-12
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 4
- ISSN
- 0969-5893 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2850
- PMC
- PMC6329472
- OpenAlex
- W2905212201
- Cited by
- 132
- References
- 75
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 11.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Clinical Psychology Science and Practice (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health (F31MH112211)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
- Keywords
- intervention fidelity, implementation fidelity, protocol flexibility, clinical decision-making, therapist training, evidence-based practice implementation
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
