Many people who would benefit from mental health services opt not to pursue them or fail to fully participate once they have begun. One of the reasons for this disconnect is stigma; namely, to avoid the label of mental illness and the harm it brings, people decide not to seek or fully participate in care. Stigma yields 2 kinds of harm that may impede treatment participation: It diminishes self-esteem and robs people of social opportunities. Given the existing literature in this area, recommendations are reviewed for ongoing research that will more comprehensively expand understanding of the stigma-care seeking link. Implications for the development of antistigma programs that might promote care seeking and participation are also reviewed.

/pdf/how-stigma-interferes-with-mental-health-care-35qwi45aiy.pdf

How stigma interferes with mental health care.

A scheme is proposed for determining when a psychological treatment for a specific problem or disorder may be considered to be established in efficacy or to be possibly efficacious. The importance of independent replication before a treatment is established in efficacy is emphasized, and a number of factors are elaborated that should be weighed in evaluating whether studies supporting a treatment's efficacy are sound. It is suggested that, in evaluating the benefits of a given treatment, the greatest weight should be given to efficacy trials but that these trials should be followed by research on effectiveness in clinical settings and with various populations and by cost-effectiveness research.

/pdf/defining-empirically-supported-therapies-35wqobhv41.pdf

Defining Empirically Supported Therapies

▪ Abstract Efforts to increase the practice of evidence-based psychotherapy in the United States have led to the formation of task forces to define, identify, and disseminate information about empirically supported psychological interventions. The work of several such task forces and other groups reviewing empirically supported treatments (ESTs) in the United States, United Kingdom, and elsewhere is summarized here, along with the lists of treatments that have been identified as ESTs. Also reviewed is the controversy surrounding EST identification and dissemination, including concerns abou research methodology, external validity, and utility of EST research, as well as the reliability and transparency of the EST review process.

Empirically Supported Psychological Interventions: Controversies and Evidence

Does batterers' treatment work? A meta-analytic review of domestic violence treatment.

The purpose of this study was to identify evidenced-based, focused intervention practices for children and youth with autism spectrum disorder. This study was an extension and elaboration of a previous evidence-based practice review reported by Odom et al. (Prev Sch Fail 54:275–282, 2010b, doi:
 10.1080/10459881003785506
 ). In the current study, a computer search initially yielded 29,105 articles, and the subsequent screening and evaluation process found 456 studies to meet inclusion and methodological criteria. From this set of research studies, the authors found 27 focused intervention practices that met the criteria for evidence-based practice (EBP). Six new EBPs were identified in this review, and one EBP from the previous review was removed. The authors discuss implications for current practices and future research.

Evidence-Based Practices for Children, Youth, and Young Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Comprehensive Review.

/pdf/update-on-empirically-validated-therapies-ii-37totkzzc1.pdf

Karen S. Calhoun

Papers

Update on Empirically Validated Therapies, II