Abstract
The authors suggest that D. Westen and K. Morrison's (2001) meta-analysis of treatment is critically limited in the consideration of measurement and mechanisms of therapeutic change. The measures included in the analysis fail to represent a comprehensive coverage of the domains within which change is expected. Moreover, they do not measure the theoretically derived constructs currently conceived as being central to each disorder. Further, the particular meta-analytical approach taken prohibits evaluation of the treatment components responsible for change. The authors reviewed the most recent data on comorbidity as an issue of treatment efficacy and generalizability, proffer an interpretation for the difference in outcome results across the 3 diagnostic groups, and discuss internally valid methodologies for the bridging from research to clinical practice.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
