IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v46y2012i6p1699-1708.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Benchmarking therapists: furthering the benchmarking method in its application to clinical practice

Author

Listed:
  • Takuya Minami

    ()

  • G.S Brown
  • Joyce McCulloch
  • Brent Bolstrom

Abstract

Psychotherapy research has been interested in understanding the variability observed among therapists with regard to their treatment effectiveness. An important initial step towards understanding the source of the differences is to reliably identify therapists that are effective. The current paper thus proposes a method for benchmarking therapists against predetermined criteria of effectiveness which could be conducted using any standard statistical package. Basic steps include (a) creating benchmark(s), (b) determining a prior the numerical criteria that constitute as “effective” based on the benchmark(s), (c) calculating pre-post effect sizes as an indicator of effectiveness at the case level using statistical adjustments so as to best match clinical (and other) differences among cases, and (d) statistically benchmarking the therapists using a random-effects hierarchical linear modeling. An example is provided that highlights the number of therapists who would be classified as effective based on various numerical criteria and confidence levels. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Suggested Citation

  • Takuya Minami & G.S Brown & Joyce McCulloch & Brent Bolstrom, 2012. "Benchmarking therapists: furthering the benchmarking method in its application to clinical practice," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 1699-1708, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:46:y:2012:i:6:p:1699-1708
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-011-9548-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11135-011-9548-4
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:46:y:2012:i:6:p:1699-1708. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.