Objective: Therapist effectiveness has primarily been defined as being the aggregate of the client therapy outcomes within a therapist's caseload. It may seem intuitive that the most skilled therapists are both effective (in the way defined above) and consistent in facilitating positive outcomes across their clients; however, this premise has not been fully tested. The present study sought to empirically examine this question in a large, multisite, geographically diverse sample. We first computed a consistency variable and an aggregate outcome variable for each therapist among a subset of each individual therapist's caseload (the first 30 clients per therapist within our data set). We then utilized this consistency score and aggregate outcome score to predict the therapy outcomes of their remaining clients. Clients' pretreatment severity scores were also included as a moderator of the association between therapist consistency, therapist aggregate outcome, and client outcomes. Method: The sample included 27,778 clients who were treated by 275 therapists. At the start of each session, clients completed the Behavioral Health Measure-20 as a measure of psychological functioning. Results: Polynomial regression and response surface analysis indicated a discrepant effect, such that subsequent clients' outcomes were highest when therapists' aggregate outcome with their first 30 clients was high and the consistency in the outcomes of their first 30 clients was also high. This relationship was not moderated by clients' pretreatment severity. Conclusion: Therapists' expertise consists of both high performance and consistency. Therapists who achieved better outcomes consistently were top performers with their subsequent clients.
What is the public health significance of this article?On average, effective therapists do not only have superior outcomes, but they are also more consistent in promoting positive therapy outcomes across the clients they treat.
This article introduces the special section on “Addressing Racism, Anti-Blackness, and Racial Trauma in Psychotherapy.” The special section was organized to highlight research and clinical practices on addressing racism, anti-Blackness, and racial trauma in psychotherapy. We provide an overview of the special section with attention to future research to continue to advance practice and scholarship on addressing racism, anti-Blackness, and racial trauma in psychotherapy.
Objective: Presently, there is a lack of research examining gendered racial disparities in psycho-oncology referral rates for Black women with cancer. Informed by intersectionality, gendered racism, and the Strong Black Woman framework, this study sought to examine the possibility that Black women are adversely affected by such phenomena as evidenced by lower probability of being referred to psycho-oncology services compared to Black men, White women and White men.Methods: Data for this study consisted of 1598 cancer patients who received psychosocial distress screening at a comprehensive cancer center in a large Midwest teaching hospital. Multilevel logistic modeling was used to examine the probability of referral to psycho-oncology services for Black women, Black men, White women, and White men while controlling for patient-reported emotional and practical problems and psychosocial distress.Results: Results indicated that Black women had the lowest probability of being referred to psycho-oncology services (2%). In comparison, the probability of being referred to psycho-oncology were 10% for White women, 9% for Black men, and 5% for White men. Additionally, as nurses' patient caseload decreased, the probability of being referred to psycho-oncology increased for Black men, White men, and White women. In contrast, nurses' patient caseload had little effect on the probability of being referred to psycho-oncology for Black women.Conclusions: These findings suggest unique factors influence psycho-oncology referral rates for Black women. Findings are discussed with particular focus on how to enhance equitable care for Black women with cancer.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.