Making assessment relevant to treatment planning: The STS clinician rating form
This article reports on the development of a computerized, clinician‐based method of assessing patient variables that contribute to differential assignment of psychotherapy models. In the current health care environment, omnibus personality tests and current state measures are both expensive and ins...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of clinical psychology 1999-07, Vol.55 (7), p.825-842 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 842 |
---|---|
container_issue | 7 |
container_start_page | 825 |
container_title | Journal of clinical psychology |
container_volume | 55 |
creator | Fisher, Daniel Beutler, Larry E. Williams, Oliver B. |
description | This article reports on the development of a computerized, clinician‐based method of assessing patient variables that contribute to differential assignment of psychotherapy models. In the current health care environment, omnibus personality tests and current state measures are both expensive and insensitive to most of the empirically defined patient characteristics that have been identified as indicators of different treatment qualities. Moreover, reliance on patient self‐report introduces a variety of distortions and limits predictive studies and follow‐up assessments to those who are cooperative. These factors limit the usefulness of the currently available procedures. Aptitude‐Treatment‐Interaction (ATI) research has revealed differential effects of manualized cognitive, interpersonal, and insight‐oriented treatments as a function on a select number of relatively specific personality and symptom qualities. A cost‐ and time‐efficient method of measuring these dimensions could increase the power of treatment by identifying in advance those that are likely to be most effective for a given patient. The STS (Systematic Treatment Selection) Clinician Rating Form is a relatively brief, clinician‐based measure of a variety of patient dimensions, including subjective distress, various aspects of coping style, and resistance traits. Current data reveal good interrater reliability and adequate levels of discriminant and convergent validity. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Clin Psychol 55: 825–842, 1999. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4679(199907)55:7<825::AID-JCLP5>3.0.CO;2-3 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_wiley</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_236938975</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>43073876</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p1915-b8e13202ab1e8fa6eab65535b798e999a66eb91b722197878aab2425b77677753</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kMtOwzAQRS0EEqXwDxGrdpHiR23H4SFV4VVUFKQWtiOnciElTYKdgvr3OCliNVczd-5oDkLXBI8IxvRiMJ8m0yHBSoZjIdWAKKWwHHIey6uI8jieTG_Dp2T2wm_YCI-S9JKG7AD1_jcOUc_nkFBJQY_RiXNrjPEYE95D6bP-zMv3QDtnnNuYsgmsKcy39qKpgsYa3XTdutBl6Z1xsPgwwXwxD5ZFXubLXJeB1U2bsars5hQdrXThzNlf7aPX-7tF8hjO0odpMpmFNVGEh1lkCKOY6oyYaKWF0ZngnPFMqsj497QQJlMkk5QSJSMZaZ3RMfVzKaSUnPXR-T63ttXX1rgG1tXWlv4kUCYUi1RnetubfvLC7KC2-UbbHRAMLVdosUILCVpIsMcKnIMEjxU8VeioAgMMSQrUi67BfgEf7nGd</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>236938975</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Making assessment relevant to treatment planning: The STS clinician rating form</title><source>Education Source</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Fisher, Daniel ; Beutler, Larry E. ; Williams, Oliver B.</creator><creatorcontrib>Fisher, Daniel ; Beutler, Larry E. ; Williams, Oliver B.</creatorcontrib><description>This article reports on the development of a computerized, clinician‐based method of assessing patient variables that contribute to differential assignment of psychotherapy models. In the current health care environment, omnibus personality tests and current state measures are both expensive and insensitive to most of the empirically defined patient characteristics that have been identified as indicators of different treatment qualities. Moreover, reliance on patient self‐report introduces a variety of distortions and limits predictive studies and follow‐up assessments to those who are cooperative. These factors limit the usefulness of the currently available procedures. Aptitude‐Treatment‐Interaction (ATI) research has revealed differential effects of manualized cognitive, interpersonal, and insight‐oriented treatments as a function on a select number of relatively specific personality and symptom qualities. A cost‐ and time‐efficient method of measuring these dimensions could increase the power of treatment by identifying in advance those that are likely to be most effective for a given patient. The STS (Systematic Treatment Selection) Clinician Rating Form is a relatively brief, clinician‐based measure of a variety of patient dimensions, including subjective distress, various aspects of coping style, and resistance traits. Current data reveal good interrater reliability and adequate levels of discriminant and convergent validity. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Clin Psychol 55: 825–842, 1999.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-9762</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-4679</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4679(199907)55:7<825::AID-JCLP5>3.0.CO;2-3</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JCPYAO</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Managed care ; Psychological tests ; Psychology</subject><ispartof>Journal of clinical psychology, 1999-07, Vol.55 (7), p.825-842</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright Wiley Periodicals Inc. Jul 1999</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2F%28SICI%291097-4679%28199907%2955%3A7%3C825%3A%3AAID-JCLP5%3E3.0.CO%3B2-3$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2F%28SICI%291097-4679%28199907%2955%3A7%3C825%3A%3AAID-JCLP5%3E3.0.CO%3B2-3$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Fisher, Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beutler, Larry E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Williams, Oliver B.</creatorcontrib><title>Making assessment relevant to treatment planning: The STS clinician rating form</title><title>Journal of clinical psychology</title><description>This article reports on the development of a computerized, clinician‐based method of assessing patient variables that contribute to differential assignment of psychotherapy models. In the current health care environment, omnibus personality tests and current state measures are both expensive and insensitive to most of the empirically defined patient characteristics that have been identified as indicators of different treatment qualities. Moreover, reliance on patient self‐report introduces a variety of distortions and limits predictive studies and follow‐up assessments to those who are cooperative. These factors limit the usefulness of the currently available procedures. Aptitude‐Treatment‐Interaction (ATI) research has revealed differential effects of manualized cognitive, interpersonal, and insight‐oriented treatments as a function on a select number of relatively specific personality and symptom qualities. A cost‐ and time‐efficient method of measuring these dimensions could increase the power of treatment by identifying in advance those that are likely to be most effective for a given patient. The STS (Systematic Treatment Selection) Clinician Rating Form is a relatively brief, clinician‐based measure of a variety of patient dimensions, including subjective distress, various aspects of coping style, and resistance traits. Current data reveal good interrater reliability and adequate levels of discriminant and convergent validity. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Clin Psychol 55: 825–842, 1999.</description><subject>Managed care</subject><subject>Psychological tests</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><issn>0021-9762</issn><issn>1097-4679</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1999</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid/><recordid>eNo9kMtOwzAQRS0EEqXwDxGrdpHiR23H4SFV4VVUFKQWtiOnciElTYKdgvr3OCliNVczd-5oDkLXBI8IxvRiMJ8m0yHBSoZjIdWAKKWwHHIey6uI8jieTG_Dp2T2wm_YCI-S9JKG7AD1_jcOUc_nkFBJQY_RiXNrjPEYE95D6bP-zMv3QDtnnNuYsgmsKcy39qKpgsYa3XTdutBl6Z1xsPgwwXwxD5ZFXubLXJeB1U2bsars5hQdrXThzNlf7aPX-7tF8hjO0odpMpmFNVGEh1lkCKOY6oyYaKWF0ZngnPFMqsj497QQJlMkk5QSJSMZaZ3RMfVzKaSUnPXR-T63ttXX1rgG1tXWlv4kUCYUi1RnetubfvLC7KC2-UbbHRAMLVdosUILCVpIsMcKnIMEjxU8VeioAgMMSQrUi67BfgEf7nGd</recordid><startdate>199907</startdate><enddate>199907</enddate><creator>Fisher, Daniel</creator><creator>Beutler, Larry E.</creator><creator>Williams, Oliver B.</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><general>Wiley Periodicals Inc</general><scope/></search><sort><creationdate>199907</creationdate><title>Making assessment relevant to treatment planning: The STS clinician rating form</title><author>Fisher, Daniel ; Beutler, Larry E. ; Williams, Oliver B.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p1915-b8e13202ab1e8fa6eab65535b798e999a66eb91b722197878aab2425b77677753</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1999</creationdate><topic>Managed care</topic><topic>Psychological tests</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Fisher, Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beutler, Larry E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Williams, Oliver B.</creatorcontrib><jtitle>Journal of clinical psychology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Fisher, Daniel</au><au>Beutler, Larry E.</au><au>Williams, Oliver B.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Making assessment relevant to treatment planning: The STS clinician rating form</atitle><jtitle>Journal of clinical psychology</jtitle><date>1999-07</date><risdate>1999</risdate><volume>55</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>825</spage><epage>842</epage><pages>825-842</pages><issn>0021-9762</issn><eissn>1097-4679</eissn><coden>JCPYAO</coden><abstract>This article reports on the development of a computerized, clinician‐based method of assessing patient variables that contribute to differential assignment of psychotherapy models. In the current health care environment, omnibus personality tests and current state measures are both expensive and insensitive to most of the empirically defined patient characteristics that have been identified as indicators of different treatment qualities. Moreover, reliance on patient self‐report introduces a variety of distortions and limits predictive studies and follow‐up assessments to those who are cooperative. These factors limit the usefulness of the currently available procedures. Aptitude‐Treatment‐Interaction (ATI) research has revealed differential effects of manualized cognitive, interpersonal, and insight‐oriented treatments as a function on a select number of relatively specific personality and symptom qualities. A cost‐ and time‐efficient method of measuring these dimensions could increase the power of treatment by identifying in advance those that are likely to be most effective for a given patient. The STS (Systematic Treatment Selection) Clinician Rating Form is a relatively brief, clinician‐based measure of a variety of patient dimensions, including subjective distress, various aspects of coping style, and resistance traits. Current data reveal good interrater reliability and adequate levels of discriminant and convergent validity. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Clin Psychol 55: 825–842, 1999.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</pub><doi>10.1002/(SICI)1097-4679(199907)55:7<825::AID-JCLP5>3.0.CO;2-3</doi><tpages>18</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0021-9762 |
ispartof | Journal of clinical psychology, 1999-07, Vol.55 (7), p.825-842 |
issn | 0021-9762 1097-4679 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_236938975 |
source | Education Source; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
subjects | Managed care Psychological tests Psychology |
title | Making assessment relevant to treatment planning: The STS clinician rating form |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T00%3A59%3A30IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_wiley&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Making%20assessment%20relevant%20to%20treatment%20planning:%20The%20STS%20clinician%20rating%20form&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20clinical%20psychology&rft.au=Fisher,%20Daniel&rft.date=1999-07&rft.volume=55&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=825&rft.epage=842&rft.pages=825-842&rft.issn=0021-9762&rft.eissn=1097-4679&rft.coden=JCPYAO&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4679(199907)55:7%3C825::AID-JCLP5%3E3.0.CO;2-3&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_wiley%3E43073876%3C/proquest_wiley%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=236938975&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |