Tratamientos Psicológicos Empíricamente Apoyados Para Adultos: Una Revisión Selectiva [Evidence-Based Psychological Treatments for Adults: A Selective Review]

Antecedentes: los tratamientos psicológicos han mostrado su efi cacia, efectividad y efi ciencia para el abordaje de los trastornos mentales; no obstante, considerando el conocimiento científi co generado en los últimos años, no se dispone de trabajos de actualización en español sobre cuáles son los tratamientos psicológicos con respaldo empírico. El objetivo fue realizar una revisión selectiva de los principales tratamientos psicológicos empíricamente apoyados para el abordaje de trastornos mentales en personas adultas. Método: se recogen niveles de evidencia y grados de recomendación en función de los criterios propuestos por el Sistema Nacional de Salud de España (en las Guías de Práctica Clínica) para diferentes trastornos psicológicos. Resultados: los resultados sugieren que los tratamientos psicológicos disponen de apoyo empírico para el abordaje de un amplio elenco de trastornos psicológicos. El grado de apoyo empírico oscila de bajo a alto en función del trastorno psicológico analizado. La revisión sugiere que ciertos campos de intervención necesitan una mayor investigación. Conclusiones: a partir de esta revisión selectiva, los profesionales de la psicología podrán disponer de información rigurosa y actualizada que les permita tomar decisiones informadas a la hora de implementar aquellos procedimientos psicoterapéuticos empíricamente fundamentados en función de las características de las personas que demandan ayuda. // Evidence-Based Psychological Treatments for Adults: A Selective Review. Background: Psychological treatments have shown their effi cacy, effectiveness, and effi ciency in dealing with mental disorders. However, considering the scientifi c knowledge generated in recent years, in the Spanish context, there are no updating studies about empirically supported psychological treatments. The main goal was to carry out a selective review of the main empirically supported psychological treatments for mental disorders in adults. Method: Levels of evidence and degrees of recommendation were collected based on the criteria proposed by the Spanish National Health System (Clinical Practice Guidelines) for different psychological disorders. Results: The results indicate that psychological treatments have empirical support for the approach to a wide range of psychological disorders. These levels of empirical evidence gathered range from low to high depending on the psychological disorder analysed. The review indicates the existence of certain fi elds of intervention that need further investigation. Conclusions: Based on this selective review, psychology professionals will be able to have rigorous, up-to-date information that allows them to make informed decisions when implementing empirically based psychotherapeutic procedures based on the characteristics of the people who require help

Phylogenomic analysis of a 55.1-kb 19-gene dataset resolves a monophyletic Fusarium that includes the Fusarium solani species complex.

Scientific communication is facilitated by a data-driven, scientifically sound taxonomy that considers the end-user's needs and established successful practice. In 2013, the Fusarium community voiced near unanimous support for a concept of Fusarium that represented a clade comprising all agriculturally and clinically important Fusarium species, including the F. solani species complex (FSSC). Subsequently, this concept was challenged in 2015 by one research group who proposed dividing the genus Fusarium into seven genera, including the FSSC described as members of the genus Neocosmospora, with subsequent justification in 2018 based on claims that the 2013 concept of Fusarium is polyphyletic. Here, we test this claim and provide a phylogeny based on exonic nucleotide sequences of 19 orthologous protein-coding genes that strongly support the monophyly of Fusarium including the FSSC. We reassert the practical and scientific argument in support of a genus Fusarium that includes the FSSC and several other basal lineages, consistent with the longstanding use of this name among plant pathologists, medical mycologists, quarantine officials, regulatory agencies, students, and researchers with a stake in its taxonomy. In recognition of this monophyly, 40 species described as genus Neocosmospora were recombined in genus Fusarium, and nine others were renamed Fusarium. Here the global Fusarium community voices strong support for the inclusion of the FSSC in Fusarium, as it remains the best scientific, nomenclatural, and practical taxonomic option available