1987
DOI: 10.1016/0272-7358(87)90002-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A review of meta-analyses conducted on psychotherapy outcome research

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
27
0

Year Published

1995
1995
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 46 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
6
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Unlike qualitative reviews, meta-analytic studies have the advantage of identifying a quantitative measure of the strength of the effect. The value of meta-analytic review results is dependent on the degree to which they have methodological and conceptual validity (Brown, 1987). Unfortunately, current large-scale review efforts are rarely systematic or routinely published.…”
Section: Methodological Issuesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Unlike qualitative reviews, meta-analytic studies have the advantage of identifying a quantitative measure of the strength of the effect. The value of meta-analytic review results is dependent on the degree to which they have methodological and conceptual validity (Brown, 1987). Unfortunately, current large-scale review efforts are rarely systematic or routinely published.…”
Section: Methodological Issuesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two types of review methods are common in counseling outcome research. Meta-analytic studies (quantitative reviews) combine the results of various clinical trial studies producing quantitative measures of effect size across multiple studies (Brown, 1987). Effect size represents an estimation of the strength of the intervention being studied in the intervention group compared with the control group.…”
Section: Study Classificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Metaanalytic studies are appealing because they produce effect sizes that measure the magnitude of effects. Wampold (2001) and others (Brown, 1987;Rosenthal, 1985;Shadish & Baldwin, 2002) have noted that meta-analysis is an invaluable tool to translate the diverse findings of individual clinical trial studies into trends that have practice implications. The work of Wampold in particular is an outstanding scholarly analysis of the common factors versus specific model factors in therapeutic outcomes.…”
Section: Is There Research Support For Common Factors?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If one takes a broad-based metaanalytic approach, then the answer is "Yes." Studies that include age ranges 2-18 years and cut across modalities and types ofproblem as recently as 1995 show mean effect sizes ranging from 0.71 to 0.84 (100)(101)(102)(103)(104), which is similar to outcomes in metaanalytic studies of adult psychotherapy. The average child after treatment functioned better than did 78%…”
Section: Psychotherapy With Children and Adolescentsmentioning
confidence: 68%