Annual Review of Clinical Psychology最新文献

To build a coherent knowledge base about what psychological intervention strategies work, develop interventions that have positive societal impact, and maintain and increase this impact over time, it is necessary to replace the classical treatment package research paradigm. The multiphase optimization strategy (MOST) is an alternative paradigm that integrates ideas from behavioral science, engineering, implementation science, economics, and decision science. MOST enables optimization of interventions to strategically balance effectiveness, affordability, scalability, and efficiency. In this review we provide an overview of MOST, discuss several experimental designs that can be used in intervention optimization, consider how the investigator can use experimental results to select components for inclusion in the optimized intervention, discuss the application of MOST in implementation science, and list future issues in this rapidly evolving field. We highlight the feasibility of adopting this new research paradigm as well as its potential to hasten the progress of psychological intervention science.

Evidence from epidemiological, clinical, and biological research resulted in the immune hypothesis: the hypothesis that immune system dysfunction is involved in the pathophysiology of schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD). The promising implication of this hypothesis is the potential to use existing immunomodulatory treatment for innovative interventions for SSD. Here, we provide a selective historical review of important discoveries that have shaped our understanding of immune dysfunction in SSD. We first explain the basic principles of immune dysfunction, after which we travel more than a century back in time. Starting our journey with neurosyphilis-associated psychosis in the nineteenth century, we continue by evaluating the role of infections and autoimmunity in SSD and findings from assessment of immune function using new techniques, such as cytokine levels, microglia density, neuroimaging, and gene expression. Drawing from these findings, we discuss anti-inflammatory interventions for SSD, and we conclude with a look into the future.

Depression is an eminently treatable disorder that responds to psychotherapy or medications; the efficacy of each has been established in hundreds of controlled trials. Nonetheless, the prevalence of depression has increased in recent years despite the existence of efficacious treatments-a phenomenon known as the treatment-prevalence paradox. We consider several possible explanations for this paradox, which range from a misunderstanding of the very nature of depression, inflated efficacy of the established treatments, and a lack of access to efficacious delivery of treatments. We find support for each of these possible explanations but especially the notion that large segments of the population lack access to efficacious treatments that are implemented as intended. We conclude by describing the potential of using lay therapists and digital technologies to overcome this lack of access and to reach historically underserved populations and simultaneously guarantee the quality of the interventions delivered.

Specific psychological treatments have demonstrated efficacy and represent the first-line approaches recommended for anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, and binge-eating disorder. Unfortunately, many patients, particularly those with anorexia nervosa, do not derive sufficient benefit from existing treatments, and better or alternative treatments for eating disorders are needed. Less progress has been made in developing pharmacologic options for eating disorders. No medications approved for anorexia nervosa exist, and only one each exists for bulimia nervosa and for binge-eating disorder; available data indicate that most patients fail to benefit from available medications. Longer and combined treatments have generally not enhanced outcomes. This review presents emerging findings from more complex and clinically relevant adaptive treatment designs, as they offer some clinical guidance and may serve as models for future enhanced treatment research.

Receiving my doctorate in 1961 just as John F. Kennedy was inaugurated president of the United States, I was inspired by his sentiment that any person can make a difference, and every person should try. In this memoir I review my professional journey of trying to make a difference in researching, teaching, supervising, and practicing clinical psychology and psychotherapy. I began my career by working on an evidence base for projective techniques. Upon joining the Stony Brook faculty, I shifted my efforts to research on and practice of behavior therapy, and then to the incorporation of cognition in developing cognitive behavioral therapy. Further work on integration consisted of closing the gap between research and practice, lowering the barriers that existed across schools of therapy, and incorporating lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender issues into mainstream psychology.

The Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD) is a dimensional, empirically based diagnostic system developed to overcome the serious limitations of traditional categories. We review the mounting evidence on its convergent and discriminant validity, with an incursion into the less-studied ICD-11 system. In the literature, the AMPD's Pathological Trait Model (Criterion B) shows excellent convergence with normal personality traits, and it could be useful as an organizing framework for mental disorders. In contrast, Personality Functioning (Criterion A) cannot be distinguished from personality traits, lacks both discriminant and incremental validity, and has a shaky theoretical background. We offer some suggestions with a view to the future. These include removing Criterion A, using the real-life consequences of traits as indicators of severity, delving into the dynamic mechanisms underlying traits, and furthering the integration of currently disengaged psychological paradigms that can shape a sounder clinical science.

Throughout time, ethnoracial groups have endured a range of traumatic experiences as historically marginalized members of the United States. The consequences of these experiences have been referred to as historical trauma (HT): a collective trauma, inflicted on a group of people who share a specific identity, that has psychological, physical, and social impacts on succeeding generations. In this review, we examine the literature on HT in relation to US ethnoracial groups by defining HT, providing a background for its development, and describing critiques of the concept. We then review the literature on HT in relation to Indigenous Americans, African Americans, and Asian Americans. For each group, we address the nature of HT, the transmission of HT and its impacts, and healing strategies. We conclude with a summary of the benefits, limitations, and complexities of HT research as well as recommendations for future work in this area.