Is diagnosis enough to guide interventions in mental health? Using case formulation in clinical practice

While diagnosis has traditionally been viewed as an essential concept in medicine, particularly when selecting treatments, we suggest that the use of diagnosis alone may be limited, particularly within mental health. The concept of clinical case formulation advocates for collaboratively working with patients to identify idiosyncratic aspects of their presentation and select interventions on this basis. Identifying individualized contributing factors, and how these could influence the person\u27s presentation, in addition to attending to personal strengths, may allow the clinician a deeper understanding of a patient, result in a more personalized treatment approach, and potentially provide a better clinical outcome.<br /

From Euclidean Geometry to Knots and Nets

This document is the Accepted Manuscript of an article accepted for publication in Synthese. Under embargo until 19 September 2018. The final publication is available at Springer via https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1558-x.This paper assumes the success of arguments against the view that informal mathematical proofs secure rational conviction in virtue of their relations with corresponding formal derivations. This assumption entails a need for an alternative account of the logic of informal mathematical proofs. Following examination of case studies by Manders, De Toffoli and Giardino, Leitgeb, Feferman and others, this paper proposes a framework for analysing those informal proofs that appeal to the perception or modification of diagrams or to the inspection or imaginative manipulation of mental models of mathematical phenomena. Proofs relying on diagrams can be rigorous if (a) it is easy to draw a diagram that shares or otherwise indicates the structure of the mathematical object, (b) the information thus displayed is not metrical and (c) it is possible to put the inferences into systematic mathematical relation with other mathematical inferential practices. Proofs that appeal to mental models can be rigorous if the mental models can be externalised as diagrammatic practice that satisfies these three conditions.Peer reviewe

Evidence-Based Case Conceptualization/Evidence-Based Clinical Decision Making

This chapter defines the fundamentals of case conceptualizationCase conceptualization and presents a case conceptualization model designed to support evidence-based practiceEvidence-based practice in serving children and adolescents. This science-informedCase conceptualizationscience informed case conceptualization model helps guide the treatment process throughout treatment and is designed to cut across age groups, disorders, and theoretical treatment approaches. Evidence-based practice emphasizes using research and clinical information to inform clinical decision-making. Although discussions have often focused on evidence-based treatments, evidence-based practiceEvidence-based practice is a broader concept that encompasses treatment, assessment, case conceptualization, and the relationship between client and therapist. Case conceptualization is defined as developing a complete picture of a client to generate a treatment plan by collecting data that are used to generate hypotheses about the causes, antecedents, and maintaining influences for an individual client’s problems within a biopsychosocial context. When done well, case conceptualization blends data generated by evidence-based assessmentEvidence-based assessment, the research literature on psychopathology and treatments, and information about a client’s characteristics, values, and preferences in order to generate a personalized, evidence-informed treatment plan. Adopting a scientific approach to case conceptualization helps therapists guide the clinical decision-Clinical decision-makingmaking process from intake to termination