Clinical Psychology Review最新文献

英文中文

Evaluation of outcome measures for assessing problematic pornography use: A COSMIN systematic review of measurement properties 评估有问题的色情使用的结果措施的评估：COSMIN测量特性的系统回顾

IF 12.8 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Clinical Psychology Review

Pub Date : 2026-02-05 DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102710

Feng Jin, Wenwen Zhang, Pengshuo Wang, Beáta Bőthe, Ziqi Wang

引用次数: 0

Ketamine-assisted psychotherapies for mental disorders: A historical overview and systematic review 氯胺酮辅助精神障碍的心理治疗：历史回顾和系统回顾

IF 12.8 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Clinical Psychology Review

Pub Date : 2026-02-03 DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102706

J.K.E. Veraart, N. Schimmers, J.J. Breeksema, C. Seybert, J. Kamphuis, L.F.T. Huber, A. Rota, Daniël T. Coerts, A.J. Oliveira-Maia, R.A. Schoevers

引用次数: 0

Cognitive bias modification in alcohol use disorder and problematic drinking: A revised and updated IPD Bayesian meta-analysis 酒精使用障碍和问题饮酒的认知偏差修正：一项修订和更新的IPD贝叶斯荟萃分析

IF 12.8 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Clinical Psychology Review

Pub Date : 2026-02-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102709

Ting Pan, Xiaochang Zhao, František Bartoš, Helle Larsen, Victoria Manning, Marilisa Boffo, Reinout W. Wiers

引用次数: 0

Treatment modifiers of interpersonal functioning in psychotherapy for people with borderline personality disorder: Systematic review with meta-analyses of individual participant data 边缘型人格障碍患者心理治疗中人际功能的治疗修饰因素：个体参与者数据荟萃分析的系统回顾

IF 12.8 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Clinical Psychology Review

Pub Date : 2026-01-28 DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102707

Johanne Pereira Ribeiro, Jutta Stoffers-Winterling, Mie Sedoc Jørgensen, Sophie Juul, Minoo Matbouriahi, David Fisher, Wouter van Ballegooijen, Mickey Kongerslev, Erik Simonsen, Eirini Karyotaki, Pim Cuijpers, Anthony Bateman, Jan Philipp Klein, Federico Amianto, Peter Fonagy, Katherine Dixon-Gordon, Alexander L. Chapman, Kathleen Thomaes, Gitta A. Jacob, Ueli Kramer, Björn Philips, Johan Franck, Stefan Priebe, Mary C. Zanarini, Donald W. Black, Shelley McMain, Jack Dekker, Ole Jakob Storebø

引用次数: 0

Waiting for translation: A review of translational research in psychological treatment 等待翻译：心理治疗的翻译研究综述

IF 12.2 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Clinical Psychology Review

Pub Date : 2026-01-25 DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102708

Claudiu Petrule , André Bittermann , Viktoria Ritter , Winfried Rief , Anke Haberkamp

Translational psychological treatment aims to translate basic research findings and principles into novel psychological interventions, but recent research indicates unrealized potential. To better understand and overcome barriers in this translational process, we systematically reviewed 647 publications from a recently published bibliographic dataset. We took a mixed-methods approach, drawing on a previously proposed conceptual framework for translational research in clinical psychology. Specifically, we identified the exact translational stage of each publication and specified the object of translation, the targeted disorder, the proposed intervention, and the direction of translation. We further analyzed distribution patterns across translational stages and assessed differences in basic psychological subfields. In addition, we examined discussion sections to identify recurring challenges and strategic recommendations regarding the process of translation.

Results show that extinction learning, emotion regulation, and inhibitory learning are the most frequently translated basic science constructs, with remarkable bottlenecks between establishing causality and intervention development. Quantitative analyses revealed a non-linear progression through translational stages and the strongest translation pathways from physiological psychology/neuropsychology and experimental psychology. Qualitative analyses identified methodological challenges, including a preference for simpler mechanisms, and conceptual barriers stemming from terminological inconsistencies. We conclude that more systematic approaches to intervention development are needed and propose strategies to accelerate the translation of basic psychological science into effective clinical applications.

转化心理治疗旨在将基础研究成果和原理转化为新的心理干预措施，但最近的研究表明其潜力尚未实现。为了更好地理解和克服翻译过程中的障碍，我们系统地回顾了最近出版的书目数据集中的647篇出版物。我们采用了混合方法，借鉴了先前提出的临床心理学转化研究的概念框架。具体而言，我们确定了每篇出版物的准确翻译阶段，并指定了翻译对象、目标障碍、建议干预和翻译方向。我们进一步分析了翻译阶段的分布模式，并评估了基本心理子领域的差异。此外，我们还审查了讨论部分，以确定关于翻译过程的经常性挑战和战略建议。结果表明，消退学习、情绪调节和抑制性学习是翻译频率最高的基础科学构念，其因果关系的建立与干预发展之间存在显著的瓶颈。定量分析揭示了生理心理学/神经心理学和实验心理学中最强的翻译途径。定性分析确定了方法论上的挑战，包括对更简单机制的偏好，以及术语不一致造成的概念障碍。我们得出结论，需要更系统的干预开发方法，并提出了加速将基础心理科学转化为有效临床应用的策略。

{"title":"Waiting for translation: A review of translational research in psychological treatment","authors":"Claudiu Petrule , André Bittermann , Viktoria Ritter , Winfried Rief , Anke Haberkamp","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102708","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102708","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Translational psychological treatment aims to translate basic research findings and principles into novel psychological interventions, but recent research indicates unrealized potential. To better understand and overcome barriers in this translational process, we systematically reviewed 647 publications from a recently published bibliographic dataset. We took a mixed-methods approach, drawing on a previously proposed conceptual framework for translational research in clinical psychology. Specifically, we identified the exact translational stage of each publication and specified the object of translation, the targeted disorder, the proposed intervention, and the direction of translation. We further analyzed distribution patterns across translational stages and assessed differences in basic psychological subfields. In addition, we examined discussion sections to identify recurring challenges and strategic recommendations regarding the process of translation.</div><div>Results show that extinction learning, emotion regulation, and inhibitory learning are the most frequently translated basic science constructs, with remarkable bottlenecks between establishing causality and intervention development. Quantitative analyses revealed a non-linear progression through translational stages and the strongest translation pathways from physiological psychology/neuropsychology and experimental psychology. Qualitative analyses identified methodological challenges, including a preference for simpler mechanisms, and conceptual barriers stemming from terminological inconsistencies. We conclude that more systematic approaches to intervention development are needed and propose strategies to accelerate the translation of basic psychological science into effective clinical applications.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":"124 ","pages":"Article 102708"},"PeriodicalIF":12.2,"publicationDate":"2026-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146048518","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The conceptualization and assessment of dissociation: An umbrella review of synthesis studies 解离的概念化和评估：综合研究的概括性回顾

IF 12.2 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Clinical Psychology Review

Pub Date : 2026-01-23 DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102702

Carlo Garofalo , Irene Severi , Gianluca Bruno , Elisa Delvecchio , Adriano Schimmenti , Claudia Mazzeschi

Dissociation is a central yet controversial topic in psychopathology, eliciting interest from diverse areas of mental health research and clinical practice. Fundamental debates persist regarding its conceptualization and measurement. The present umbrella review synthesizes findings from all existing systematic reviews (n = 44), meta-analyses (n = 27), and mixed works (i.e., both systematic reviews and meta-analyses; n = 4) on dissociation, published between 1996 and 2025, encompassing 3864 primary studies and over 1,596,432 participants. We addressed three foundational questions: (1) Is dissociation conceptualized and measured as a categorical or dimensional construct? (2) Is it conceptualized and measured as unidimensional or multidimensional? (3) Do synthesis studies account for sample-specific factors such as culture, language, or environment? Regarding (1), findings revealed an almost equal split in the conceptualization of dissociation as categorical versus dimensional. However, measurement predominantly employs continuous scales, revealing inconsistencies between theoretical framing and empirical methods. Regarding (2), most studies endorse a multidimensional understanding of dissociation. Yet, most studies rely on total scores rather than subscale-level analyses. This suggests divergence in how multidimensionality is operationalized. Regarding (3), despite frequent use of group comparisons, few reviews systematically address cross-cultural or contextual comparability. This raises concerns about measurement validity across diverse populations. Overall, this review highlights a hybrid and sometimes inconsistent approach to dissociation in the literature. Advancing the field requires greater alignment between conceptual models and methods of operationalization, as well as systematic attention to cultural and contextual influences on dissociation assessment. Establishing consensus in these areas will strengthen theoretical clarity and improve the rigor and relevance of future research on dissociation.

在精神病理学中，分离是一个中心但有争议的话题，引起了心理健康研究和临床实践各个领域的兴趣。关于其概念化和测量的基本争论仍然存在。本综述综合了1996年至2025年间发表的关于分离的所有现有系统综述（n = 44）、荟萃分析（n = 27）和混合研究（即系统综述和荟萃分析；n = 4）的研究结果，包括3864项主要研究和超过1,596,432名参与者。我们解决了三个基本问题：(1)解离是作为分类结构还是维度结构来概念化和测量的？(2)它是单维的还是多维的？(3)综合研究是否考虑了样本的特定因素，如文化、语言或环境？关于(1)，研究结果显示，在分类与维度分离的概念化中，分裂几乎相等。然而，测量主要采用连续尺度，揭示理论框架和经验方法之间的不一致。关于(2)，大多数研究支持对解离的多维理解。然而，大多数研究依赖于总分，而不是亚量表水平的分析。这表明多维度是如何运作的分歧。关于(3)，尽管经常使用群体比较，但很少有综述系统地讨论跨文化或上下文可比性。这引起了对不同人群测量有效性的关注。总的来说，这篇综述强调了文献中分离的混合和有时不一致的方法。推进这一领域需要在概念模型和操作方法之间取得更大的一致，以及系统地注意对分离评估的文化和背景影响。在这些领域建立共识将加强理论的清晰度，提高未来离解研究的严谨性和相关性。

{"title":"The conceptualization and assessment of dissociation: An umbrella review of synthesis studies","authors":"Carlo Garofalo , Irene Severi , Gianluca Bruno , Elisa Delvecchio , Adriano Schimmenti , Claudia Mazzeschi","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102702","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102702","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Dissociation is a central yet controversial topic in psychopathology, eliciting interest from diverse areas of mental health research and clinical practice. Fundamental debates persist regarding its conceptualization and measurement. The present umbrella review synthesizes findings from all existing systematic reviews (<em>n</em> = 44), meta-analyses (<em>n</em> = 27), and mixed works (i.e., both systematic reviews and meta-analyses; <em>n</em> = 4) on dissociation, published between 1996 and 2025, encompassing 3864 primary studies and over 1,596,432 participants. We addressed three foundational questions: (1) Is dissociation conceptualized and measured as a categorical or dimensional construct? (2) Is it conceptualized and measured as unidimensional or multidimensional? (3) Do synthesis studies account for sample-specific factors such as culture, language, or environment? Regarding (1), findings revealed an almost equal split in the conceptualization of dissociation as categorical versus dimensional. However, measurement predominantly employs continuous scales, revealing inconsistencies between theoretical framing and empirical methods. Regarding (2), most studies endorse a multidimensional understanding of dissociation. Yet, most studies rely on total scores rather than subscale-level analyses. This suggests divergence in how multidimensionality is operationalized. Regarding (3), despite frequent use of group comparisons, few reviews systematically address cross-cultural or contextual comparability. This raises concerns about measurement validity across diverse populations. Overall, this review highlights a hybrid and sometimes inconsistent approach to dissociation in the literature. Advancing the field requires greater alignment between conceptual models and methods of operationalization, as well as systematic attention to cultural and contextual influences on dissociation assessment. Establishing consensus in these areas will strengthen theoretical clarity and improve the rigor and relevance of future research on dissociation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":"124 ","pages":"Article 102702"},"PeriodicalIF":12.2,"publicationDate":"2026-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146033030","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Pain in dementia: A systematic review of the measurement properties of observational assessment tools 痴呆中的疼痛：观察性评估工具测量特性的系统回顾

IF 12.2 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Clinical Psychology Review

Pub Date : 2026-01-20 DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102704

Andrew I.G. McLennan , Emily M. Winters , Michelle M. Gagnon , Thomas Hadjistavropoulos

We conducted a systematic review of the measurement properties and quality of evidence of observational pain assessment tools for older adults with dementia. Eligible studies were peer-reviewed, written in English, had a primary aim to psychometrically examine observational pain tools in samples of older adults with dementia, and reported results for at least one psychometric measurement property (e.g., reliability, structural validity, responsiveness). Medline, PsycINFO, the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Web of Science were systematically searched for all historical records to September 2025. The review was pre-registered in PROSPERO in February 2025, and adhered to the COnsensus based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN), and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines for COSMIN systematic reviews (i.e., PRISMA-COSMIN) to evaluate and report the methodological quality, psychometric results, and strength of evidence for each tool. This standardized framework also guided our recommendations of tools based on psychometric merit. Thirty observational pain tools were identified across 121 psychometric studies, and five tools met criteria for a strong recommendation. Certain measurement properties (i.e., construct validity, responsiveness) showed stronger results and higher-quality evidence across tools, while others (e.g., structural validity, content validity) were understudied and showed inconsistent and lower-quality evidence. We summarized methodological limitations in the pre-existing literature and provided research recommendations to help direct future scholarly work in this area.

我们对老年痴呆患者观察性疼痛评估工具的测量特性和证据质量进行了系统回顾。符合条件的研究经过同行评审，以英文撰写，主要目的是对老年痴呆患者样本中的观察性疼痛工具进行心理测量学检验，并报告至少一项心理测量特性的结果（例如，信度、结构效度、反应性）。系统检索Medline、PsycINFO、护理与相关健康文献累积索引（CINAHL）和Web of Science，查找截至2025年9月的所有历史记录。该综述于2025年2月在PROSPERO预注册，并遵循基于共识的健康状况测量工具选择标准（COSMIN）和COSMIN系统评价和荟萃分析首选报告项目（PRISMA）报告指南（即PRISMA-COSMIN）来评估和报告每种工具的方学质量、心理测量结果和证据强度。这个标准化的框架也指导了我们基于心理测量价值的工具推荐。在121项心理测量研究中确定了30种观察性疼痛工具，其中5种工具符合强烈推荐标准。某些测量属性（例如，结构效度，响应性）显示出更强的结果和更高质量的证据，而其他测量属性（例如，结构效度，内容效度）研究不足，显示出不一致和低质量的证据。我们总结了现有文献中方法上的局限性，并提供了研究建议，以帮助指导该领域未来的学术工作。

{"title":"Pain in dementia: A systematic review of the measurement properties of observational assessment tools","authors":"Andrew I.G. McLennan , Emily M. Winters , Michelle M. Gagnon , Thomas Hadjistavropoulos","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102704","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102704","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>We conducted a systematic review of the measurement properties and quality of evidence of observational pain assessment tools for older adults with dementia. Eligible studies were peer-reviewed, written in English, had a primary aim to psychometrically examine observational pain tools in samples of older adults with dementia, and reported results for at least one psychometric measurement property (e.g., reliability, structural validity, responsiveness). Medline, PsycINFO, the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Web of Science were systematically searched for all historical records to September 2025. The review was pre-registered in PROSPERO in February 2025, and adhered to the COnsensus based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN), and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines for COSMIN systematic reviews (i.e., PRISMA-COSMIN) to evaluate and report the methodological quality, psychometric results, and strength of evidence for each tool. This standardized framework also guided our recommendations of tools based on psychometric merit. Thirty observational pain tools were identified across 121 psychometric studies, and five tools met criteria for a strong recommendation. Certain measurement properties (i.e., construct validity, responsiveness) showed stronger results and higher-quality evidence across tools, while others (e.g., structural validity, content validity) were understudied and showed inconsistent and lower-quality evidence. We summarized methodological limitations in the pre-existing literature and provided research recommendations to help direct future scholarly work in this area.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":"124 ","pages":"Article 102704"},"PeriodicalIF":12.2,"publicationDate":"2026-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146014391","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Addictive behaviors among people with intellectual disability: An umbrella review 智障人士的成瘾行为：概括性综述

IF 12.2 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Clinical Psychology Review

Pub Date : 2026-01-19 DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102701

Amalia Udeanu , Gloria Garcia-Fernandez , M. Lucía Morán , Juan Antonio García-Aller , Estrella Fernández , Laura E. Gómez

Introduction

Addictive behaviors pose significant challenges for people with intellectual disability (ID), yet research remains limited. This umbrella review aims to synthesize evidence from systematic reviews on substance use (SU), gambling, and gaming among people with ID, focusing on prevalence and patterns, risk factors and motivations, and intervention approaches. Understanding these aspects is essential for developing effective prevention and treatment.

Method

Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews (PRIOR) guidelines, two independent reviewers searched the Web of Science, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for systematic reviews and meta-analyses focused on people with ID and SU, gambling, or gaming. Quality was assessed using the JBI Checklist for Systematic Reviews.

Results

No eligible studies were found for gambling and gaming. Nine reviews addressed SU (alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, solvents, stimulant, and depressant drugs), revealing higher prevalence among men, adults, and those with less complex support needs. Motivational, educational, and behavioral interventions were employed. Cognitive behavioral therapy, motivational enhancement therapy, and mindfulness showed potential efficacy in increasing knowledge, motivation, and reducing SU.

Conclusions

The findings underscore the importance of inclusive prevention strategies that address social determinants of health (such as socioeconomic status and living conditions), transdiagnostic protective factors, and evidence-based, person-centered, and rights-based frameworks. While SU interventions for people with ID show promise, further research and more robust designs that incorporate these conceptual perspectives is needed. Moreover, it is essential to investigate polypharmacy and behavioral addictions to address these issues from a phenomenological and contextual perspective.

成瘾行为对智障人士（ID）构成了重大挑战，但研究仍然有限。本综述旨在综合来自ID人群中物质使用（SU）、赌博和游戏的系统综述的证据，重点关注患病率和模式、风险因素和动机以及干预方法。了解这些方面对于制定有效的预防和治疗至关重要。方法根据优先报告项目综述（PRIOR）指南，两名独立的审稿人搜索了Web of Science、PsycINFO和Cochrane系统评价数据库，对ID和SU、赌博或游戏人群进行了系统评价和荟萃分析。使用JBI系统评价检查表评估质量。结果没有发现赌博和游戏的合格研究。有9篇综述讨论了SU（酒精、烟草、大麻、溶剂、兴奋剂和抑郁药物），揭示了男性、成年人和支持需求不太复杂的人群中较高的患病率。采用了动机、教育和行为干预。认知行为疗法、动机增强疗法和正念疗法在增加知识、动机和减少su方面显示出潜在的功效。结论研究结果强调了包容性预防策略的重要性，这些策略可以解决健康的社会决定因素（如社会经济地位和生活条件）、跨诊断保护因素以及基于证据、以人为本和基于权利的框架。虽然对ID患者的SU干预显示出希望，但需要进一步的研究和更强大的设计来结合这些概念观点。此外，从现象学和语境的角度研究多种药物和行为成瘾是解决这些问题的必要条件。

{"title":"Addictive behaviors among people with intellectual disability: An umbrella review","authors":"Amalia Udeanu , Gloria Garcia-Fernandez , M. Lucía Morán , Juan Antonio García-Aller , Estrella Fernández , Laura E. Gómez","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102701","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102701","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Addictive behaviors pose significant challenges for people with intellectual disability (ID), yet research remains limited. This umbrella review aims to synthesize evidence from systematic reviews on substance use (SU), gambling, and gaming among people with ID, focusing on prevalence and patterns, risk factors and motivations, and intervention approaches. Understanding these aspects is essential for developing effective prevention and treatment.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews (PRIOR) guidelines, two independent reviewers searched the Web of Science, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for systematic reviews and meta-analyses focused on people with ID and SU, gambling, or gaming. Quality was assessed using the JBI Checklist for Systematic Reviews.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>No eligible studies were found for gambling and gaming. Nine reviews addressed SU (alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, solvents, stimulant, and depressant drugs), revealing higher prevalence among men, adults, and those with less complex support needs. Motivational, educational, and behavioral interventions were employed. Cognitive behavioral therapy, motivational enhancement therapy, and mindfulness showed potential efficacy in increasing knowledge, motivation, and reducing SU.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The findings underscore the importance of inclusive prevention strategies that address social determinants of health (such as socioeconomic status and living conditions), transdiagnostic protective factors, and evidence-based, person-centered, and rights-based frameworks. While SU interventions for people with ID show promise, further research and more robust designs that incorporate these conceptual perspectives is needed. Moreover, it is essential to investigate polypharmacy and behavioral addictions to address these issues from a phenomenological and contextual perspective.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":"124 ","pages":"Article 102701"},"PeriodicalIF":12.2,"publicationDate":"2026-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146000678","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Lack of improvements in youth psychotherapies or lack of investments in detecting improvements? Future directions in psychological assessment 是在青少年心理治疗方面缺乏改进，还是在检测改进方面缺乏投资？心理评估的未来方向

IF 12.2 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Clinical Psychology Review

Pub Date : 2026-01-19 DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102705

Andres De Los Reyes , Elizabeth Talbott , Akram Yusuf , Nicole S.J. Dryburgh , Kimberly L. Goodman

Youth were experiencing mental health crises before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Following this onset, their needs for mental health services have only increased. Yet, researchers encounter barriers to confronting these crises. The effects of therapies tested in controlled trials in the present day appear to be no more potent than those of their predecessors tested in trials conducted decades ago. Across these decades of scholarly work, researchers have invested far more of their efforts toward improving technologies for therapies than they have toward improving technologies for the assessment tools used to estimate therapeutic effects. The tools used today look a lot like those used in the 1970s—mainly surveys and interviews—and our strategies for integrating the data these tools produce focus on the sliver of their data that converge or yield the same results about youth mental health. Decades of work reveal that these integration strategies are incompatible with the data conditions that typify youth mental health assessments. We must invest in innovative assessment tools and integration strategies that capitalize on all the valid data produced by these conditions. This paper details pioneering directions in future research about psychological assessment. We describe the conceptual foundations underlying these research directions and highlight recent work by the authors and others supporting this pursuit. If we empower the assessment researchers of today to develop technologically innovative assessment tools and integration strategies, then we equip the therapy researchers of tomorrow to demonstrate that investing in therapy technologies pays off.

在2019冠状病毒病大流行爆发之前，青年就经历了精神健康危机。在此之后，他们对心理健康服务的需求只会增加。然而，研究人员在面对这些危机时遇到了障碍。目前在对照试验中测试的疗法的效果似乎并不比几十年前在试验中测试的前辈疗法更有效。在这几十年的学术工作中，研究人员投入了更多的精力来改进治疗技术，而不是改进用于评估治疗效果的评估工具的技术。今天使用的工具看起来很像20世纪70年代使用的工具——主要是调查和访谈——我们整合这些工具产生的数据的策略集中在他们的数据的一小部分上，这些数据在青少年心理健康方面汇聚或产生相同的结果。几十年的工作表明，这些整合策略与典型的青少年心理健康评估的数据条件不相容。我们必须投资于创新的评估工具和整合策略，利用这些条件产生的所有有效数据。本文详细介绍了未来心理评估研究的前沿方向。我们描述了这些研究方向的概念基础，并强调了作者和其他支持这一追求的人最近的工作。如果我们授权今天的评估研究人员开发技术创新的评估工具和整合策略，那么我们就装备明天的治疗研究人员来证明投资治疗技术是有回报的。

{"title":"Lack of improvements in youth psychotherapies or lack of investments in detecting improvements? Future directions in psychological assessment","authors":"Andres De Los Reyes , Elizabeth Talbott , Akram Yusuf , Nicole S.J. Dryburgh , Kimberly L. Goodman","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102705","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102705","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Youth were experiencing mental health crises before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Following this onset, their needs for mental health services have only increased. Yet, researchers encounter barriers to confronting these crises. The effects of therapies tested in controlled trials in the present day appear to be no more potent than those of their predecessors tested in trials conducted decades ago. Across these decades of scholarly work, researchers have invested far more of their efforts toward improving technologies for therapies than they have toward improving technologies for the assessment tools used to estimate therapeutic effects. The tools used today look a lot like those used in the 1970s—mainly surveys and interviews—and our strategies for integrating the data these tools produce focus on the sliver of their data that converge or yield the same results about youth mental health. Decades of work reveal that these integration strategies are incompatible with the data conditions that typify youth mental health assessments. We must invest in innovative assessment tools and integration strategies that capitalize on all the valid data produced by these conditions. This paper details pioneering directions in future research about psychological assessment. We describe the conceptual foundations underlying these research directions and highlight recent work by the authors and others supporting this pursuit. If we empower the assessment researchers of today to develop technologically innovative assessment tools and integration strategies, then we equip the therapy researchers of tomorrow to demonstrate that investing in therapy technologies pays off.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":"124 ","pages":"Article 102705"},"PeriodicalIF":12.2,"publicationDate":"2026-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146000679","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The standalone effect of safety behavior manipulations: A systematic review and meta-analysis 安全行为操纵的独立效应：系统回顾和荟萃分析

IF 12.2 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Clinical Psychology Review

Pub Date : 2026-01-16 DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102703

Jason T. Goodson , Tapan A. Patel , James M. Zech , Matthew C. Sala , Jesse R. Cougle

Safety behaviors are maladaptive behavioral and mental strategies individuals may employ to prevent or avoid a negative symptom. While reducing safety behaviors have been a core component of cognitive-behavioral treatments, recent research has begun examining the efficacy of standalone safety behavior manipulations. Some have examined the effect of increasing the behaviors in a non-treatment experimental context while others have examined the effect of reducing these behaviors in both non-treatment and treatment contexts. In this systematic review and meta-analysis we examined the efficacy of these manipulations. A total of 26 studies were included in our review and 19 were eligible for our meta-analyses. We examined the effect of safety behavior manipulations on both safety behavior frequency and the primary symptoms within the studies. We found that relative to control, safety behavior reduction led to significantly greater reductions in safety behaviors (d = 0.52, 95% CI [0.36, 0.68]) and symptoms (d = 0.43, 95% CI [0.27, 0.59]). We also found that relative to control, safety behavior increase conditions led to significantly greater safety behaviors (d = 2.96, 95% CI [2.14, 3.78]) and clinical symptoms (d = 0.65, 95% CI [0.46, 0.83]). Some moderators emerged, and evidence of publication bias was found. Altogether, the present study provides support for the potential role safety behaviors may play in a range of disorders. Further, standalone manipulations targeting safety behaviors may be an efficacious method of reducing symptoms of psychopathology, but further research will be necessary to better understand the efficacy of this approach.

安全行为是一种适应不良的行为和心理策略，个体可以用来预防或避免消极症状。虽然减少安全行为一直是认知行为治疗的核心组成部分，但最近的研究已经开始检查独立安全行为操作的效果。一些人研究了在非治疗实验环境中增加这些行为的效果，而另一些人研究了在非治疗和治疗环境中减少这些行为的效果。在本系统综述和荟萃分析中，我们检查了这些操作的有效性。我们的综述共纳入了26项研究，其中19项符合meta分析的条件。我们在研究中检查了安全行为操作对安全行为频率和主要症状的影响。我们发现，相对于对照组，安全行为减少导致安全行为（d = 0.52, 95% CI[0.36, 0.68]）和症状（d = 0.43, 95% CI[0.27, 0.59]）显著更大的减少。我们还发现，相对于对照组，安全行为增加条件导致安全行为（d = 2.96, 95% CI[2.14, 3.78]）和临床症状（d = 0.65, 95% CI[0.46, 0.83]）显著增加。出现了一些审查员，发现了发表偏倚的证据。总之，本研究为安全行为在一系列障碍中可能发挥的潜在作用提供了支持。此外，针对安全行为的独立操作可能是减轻精神病理症状的有效方法，但需要进一步的研究来更好地了解这种方法的功效。

{"title":"The standalone effect of safety behavior manipulations: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Jason T. Goodson , Tapan A. Patel , James M. Zech , Matthew C. Sala , Jesse R. Cougle","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102703","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102703","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Safety behaviors are maladaptive behavioral and mental strategies individuals may employ to prevent or avoid a negative symptom. While reducing safety behaviors have been a core component of cognitive-behavioral treatments, recent research has begun examining the efficacy of standalone safety behavior manipulations. Some have examined the effect of increasing the behaviors in a non-treatment experimental context while others have examined the effect of reducing these behaviors in both non-treatment and treatment contexts. In this systematic review and meta-analysis we examined the efficacy of these manipulations. A total of 26 studies were included in our review and 19 were eligible for our meta-analyses. We examined the effect of safety behavior manipulations on both safety behavior frequency and the primary symptoms within the studies. We found that relative to control, safety behavior reduction led to significantly greater reductions in safety behaviors (<em>d</em> = 0.52, 95% CI [0.36, 0.68]) and symptoms (<em>d</em> = 0.43, 95% CI [0.27, 0.59]). We also found that relative to control, safety behavior increase conditions led to significantly greater safety behaviors (<em>d</em> = 2.96, 95% CI [2.14, 3.78]) and clinical symptoms (<em>d</em> = 0.65, 95% CI [0.46, 0.83]). Some moderators emerged, and evidence of publication bias was found. Altogether, the present study provides support for the potential role safety behaviors may play in a range of disorders. Further, standalone manipulations targeting safety behaviors may be an efficacious method of reducing symptoms of psychopathology, but further research will be necessary to better understand the efficacy of this approach.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":"124 ","pages":"Article 102703"},"PeriodicalIF":12.2,"publicationDate":"2026-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145995374","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

下一页尾页

类型

全部化学•材料生命科学医学物理工程技术环境•农林材料科学地球科学法学管理学化学环境科学与生态学计算机科学教育学经济学农林科学人文科学生物学数学物理与天体物理心理学综合性期刊其他工业工程理学历史学农学文学信息工程

数据库

全部 ACS Publications Elsevier ieeexplore Springer The Royal Society of Chemistry Wiley

期刊

Clinical Psychology Review

全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.

﹀