2 research outputs found
Group Level Clinical Significance: An Analysis of Current Practice
Measures of clinical significance offer important
information about psychological interventions that cannot be
garnered from tests of the statistical significance of the change
from pretest to posttest. For example, post-intervention comparisons
to a nonclinical group often offer valuable information
about the practical value of the change that occurred. This
study explored the manner in which researchers conduct clinical
significance analyses in an effort to summarize the effectiveness
of an intervention at the group level. The focus was
on the use of the original Jacobson and Truax (Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 12–19, 1991) method
and the normative comparisons method due to Kendall
et al. (Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67,
285–299, 1999). The results highlight that although the
Jacobson and Truax method is routinely adopted for summarizing
group-level clinical significance, advanced strategies
for summarizing the results are very infrequently applied. Further,
the Kendall et al. method, which provides valuable and
distinct information regarding how the treated group is
performing relative to a normal comparison group, is rarely
adopted and even when it is it is often not conducted appropriately.
Recommendations are provided for conducting
group-level clinical significance analyses.Social Sciences and Humanities Research Counci