A case for translation from the clinic to the laboratory

Laboratory procedures have been used for decades as analogues for clinical processes with the goal of improving our understanding of psychological treatments for emotional disorders and identifying strategies to make treatments more effective. This research has often focused on translation from the laboratory to the clinic. Although this approach has notable successes, it has not been seamless. There are many examples of strategies that work in the laboratory that fail to lead to improved outcomes when applied clinically. One possible reason for this gap between experimental and clinical research is a failure to focus on translation from the clinic to the laboratory. Here, we discuss potential benefits of translation from the clinic to the laboratory and provide examples of how this might be implemented. We first consider two well-established laboratory analogues (extinction and cognitive reappraisal), identify critical aspects of the related clinical procedures (exposure and cognitive restructuring) that are missing from these analogues, and propose variations to better capture the clinical process. Second, we discuss two clinical procedures that have more recently been brought into the laboratory (eye-movement desensitization and reprocessing and imagery rescripting). We conclude by highlighting potential implications of this proposed shift in focus for translational research

Enhancement of psychosocial treatment with d-cycloserine: Models, moderators, and future directions

Item does not contain fulltextAdvances in the understanding of the neurobiology of fear extinction have resulted in the development of d-cycloserine (DCS), a partial glutamatergic N-methyl-D-aspartate agonist, as an augmentation strategy for exposure treatment. We review a decade of research that has focused on the efficacy of DCS for augmenting the mechanisms (e.g., fear extinction) and outcome of exposure treatment across the anxiety disorders. Following a series of small-scale studies offering strong support for this clinical application, more recent larger-scale studies have yielded mixed results, with some showing weak or no effects. We discuss possible explanations for the mixed findings, pointing to both patient and session (i.e., learning experiences) characteristics as possible moderators of efficacy, and offer directions for future research in this area. We also review recent studies that have aimed to extend the work on DCS augmentation of exposure therapy for the anxiety disorders to DCS enhancement of learning-based interventions for addiction, anorexia nervosa, schizophrenia, and depression. Here, we attend to both DCS effects on facilitating therapeutic outcomes and additional therapeutic mechanisms beyond fear extinction (e.g., appetitive extinction, hippocampal-dependent learning).10 p