Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Psychol Bull. 2005 May;131(3):418-26, discussion 427-33.

Jousting with straw men: comment on Westen, Novotny, and Thompson-Brenner (2004).

Author information

1
Judge Baker Children's Center, Harvard University, Boston, MA 02120-3225, USA.

Abstract

Empirically supported treatments (ESTs) do not cure every patient, and the randomized trial is not a flawless methodology. Upon these often-noted and widely accepted points, D. Westen, C. M. Novotny, and H. Thompson-Brenner (2004a; see record 2004-15935-005) built a critique of ESTs and EST research. However, important work developing effective, clinically relevant treatments for serious problems was omitted from the Westen et al. (2004a) review. Little documentation was offered for the purported "assumptions" of EST methodology that Westen et al. (2004a) criticized; and different review standards were applied to studies supporting versus those disagreeing with Westen et al.'s (2004a) views. Finally, the correlational research designs proposed as a remedy by Westen et al. (2004a) have far more serious weaknesses than randomized trials, thoughtfully applied to real-world clinical care.

PMID:
15869338
DOI:
10.1037/0033-2909.131.3.418
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for American Psychological Association
    Loading ...
    Support Center