Development and preliminary validation of the Group Cognitive Therapy Scale

Misuzu Nakashima, Miki Matsunaga, Makoto Otani, Hironori Kuga, Daisuke Fujisawa
{"title":"Development and preliminary validation of the Group Cognitive Therapy Scale","authors":"Misuzu Nakashima, Miki Matsunaga, Makoto Otani, Hironori Kuga, Daisuke Fujisawa","doi":"10.1002/pcn5.128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Aim The aim of this research was to create a scale to assess the competency of therapists who conduct group cognitive behavioral therapy (G‐CBT). The scale is intended to serve as a tool to aid the training of therapists. Methods Three stepped studies were conducted. Process 1: Through literature review and experts' consensus process, essential skills for G‐CBT were articulated and categorized according to the criteria of the Cognitive Therapy Scale, a well‐established rating scale for evaluating clinicians' skills in individual cognitive behavioral therapy. The list of those skills was organized into a rating scale. Process 2: Behavioral anchors were added to each skill and were classified by the levels of difficulty (beginner, intermediate, and advanced levels), based on the rating by G‐CBT experts. Process 3: Inter‐rater reliability and validity of the rating scale were examined in a sample of 41 videotaped G‐CBT sessions of actual clinical sessions and educational role‐plays. Results The 12‐item Group Cognitive Therapy Scale (G‐CTS) was developed. It consists of 11 items that are adapted from the original Cognitive Therapy Scale, and a new 12th item called “Intervention using relationships with other participants,” which describes therapists' skills to address group dynamics. The G‐CTS showed excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α : 0.95), satisfactory inter‐rater reliability (interclass correlation coefficients: 0.65–0.88), and high predictive validity. Conclusion A novel rating scale to evaluate therapists' competency in G‐CBT was developed and successfully validated. The G‐CTS behavioral checklist created in this study provides concrete guidelines that can be used by therapists to hone their skills in G‐CBT.","PeriodicalId":74405,"journal":{"name":"PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences","volume":"144 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pcn5.128","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Aim The aim of this research was to create a scale to assess the competency of therapists who conduct group cognitive behavioral therapy (G‐CBT). The scale is intended to serve as a tool to aid the training of therapists. Methods Three stepped studies were conducted. Process 1: Through literature review and experts' consensus process, essential skills for G‐CBT were articulated and categorized according to the criteria of the Cognitive Therapy Scale, a well‐established rating scale for evaluating clinicians' skills in individual cognitive behavioral therapy. The list of those skills was organized into a rating scale. Process 2: Behavioral anchors were added to each skill and were classified by the levels of difficulty (beginner, intermediate, and advanced levels), based on the rating by G‐CBT experts. Process 3: Inter‐rater reliability and validity of the rating scale were examined in a sample of 41 videotaped G‐CBT sessions of actual clinical sessions and educational role‐plays. Results The 12‐item Group Cognitive Therapy Scale (G‐CTS) was developed. It consists of 11 items that are adapted from the original Cognitive Therapy Scale, and a new 12th item called “Intervention using relationships with other participants,” which describes therapists' skills to address group dynamics. The G‐CTS showed excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α : 0.95), satisfactory inter‐rater reliability (interclass correlation coefficients: 0.65–0.88), and high predictive validity. Conclusion A novel rating scale to evaluate therapists' competency in G‐CBT was developed and successfully validated. The G‐CTS behavioral checklist created in this study provides concrete guidelines that can be used by therapists to hone their skills in G‐CBT.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
团体认知治疗量表的开发与初步验证
摘要目的本研究的目的是创建一个量表来评估进行群体认知行为治疗(G - CBT)的治疗师的能力。该量表旨在作为辅助治疗师培训的工具。方法采用三步研究方法。过程1:通过文献回顾和专家共识过程,根据认知治疗量表的标准,明确了G - CBT的基本技能,并对其进行了分类。认知治疗量表是一个完善的评估临床医生在个体认知行为治疗中的技能的评级量表。这些技能的列表被组织成一个评定量表。过程2:将行为锚点添加到每个技能中,并根据G - CBT专家的评分,按难度等级(初级、中级和高级)进行分类。过程3:评估量表的内部信度和效度在41个G - CBT实际临床会议和教育角色扮演的录像样本中进行了检验。结果编制了12项组认知治疗量表(G - CTS)。它由11个项目组成,这些项目改编自最初的认知治疗量表,还有一个新的第12个项目,名为“利用与其他参与者的关系进行干预”,它描述了治疗师处理群体动力学的技能。G - CTS具有良好的内部一致性(Cronbach's α: 0.95),令人满意的组间信度(组间相关系数:0.65-0.88)和较高的预测效度。结论本研究开发并成功验证了一套新的G - CBT治疗师能力评估量表。本研究创建的G - CTS行为清单为治疗师提供了具体的指导方针,可以用来磨练他们在G - CBT中的技能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Adherence to outpatient care among individuals with pre-existing psychiatric disorders following the 2024 Noto Peninsula Earthquake: A retrospective study. Middle-aged man with primary hyperparathyroidism-associated psychosis: A case report. Launching a child and adolescent psychiatry training program in Mongolia inspired by Japanese models. Long-term mental health crisis among municipal public employees caused by the Fukushima nuclear accident and subsequent disasters: Questionnaire survey 10 years postdisaster. Pivotal role of venous blood gas analysis in the detection of metabolic acidosis due to laxative abuse in an anorexia nervosa patient: A case report.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1