Rationale, aims, and objectives: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) endeavour to incorporate the best available research evidence together with the clinically informed opinions of leading experts in order to guide clinical practice when dealing with a given condition. There has been increased interest in CPGs that are evidence based and that promote best practice, a central component of which is incorporating the best available research predicated on strong study designs. Despite this soaring interest, there remains heterogeneity in the methodological quality of many CPGs, which may have an effect on the quality of services that clinicians offer. In light of this, this study examined the quality of the methodology used to develop two CPGs of the Canadian Psychiatric Association (CPA). Method: The CPA's guidelines for the management of anxiety disorders (2006) and for the treatment of depressive disorders (2001) were assessed by trained raters using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II Instrument scale.Results: The blind ratings of three trained raters demonstrated that the anxiety and depression CPGs had a number of strengths and important weaknesses.Conclusion: Implications for the development of future CPGs on anxiety and depression, including recommendations to improve guideline quality in psychiatry in particular, are discussed.
This brief report addresses the attitudes of psychotherapy providers and North American psychology regulatory leaders toward evidence-based practice (EBP) precepts as applied to their psychotherapy practices. Secondary descriptive analyses of a two-phase survey concerning these attitudes of Canadian psychotherapy providers (n = 684) and psychology regulatory leaders (n = 32) were undertaken to inform the perceived utility and implementation of EBP precepts within psychotherapy practices. Results indicated that while there is general agreement among attitudes toward EBP precepts as applied to the routine clinical practices of psychotherapy providers and leaders, they are nuanced depending on the EBP tenet in question. Results are situated within the extant empirical literature on the EBP of psychotherapy in particular and of psychology more broadly, with recommendations for future research provided. While the zeitgeist is alive and well for the uptake of EBP in psychotherapy practice, important challenges remain for its advancement and implementation.
Interns in clinical psychology in Quebec are the only interns in North America who are not remunerated during their mandatory predoctoral internships. To understand the ramifications of the nonremuneration of these internships, we surveyed 503 doctoral students in clinical psychology in Quebec (i.e., students pursuing either a PsyD or PhD in clinical psychology). In particular, we focus on the socioeconomic situation of these students as well as future work intentions following internship training. Results demonstrate that Quebec doctoral students in psychology amass substantial debt during their studies. Furthermore, whereas a majority of the students completed their internship on a full-time basis, a subsample of the students reported having completed their internship on a part-time basis in tandem with their studies in order to meet their financial obligations. Respondents also were more inclined to work in the private sector following graduation, whereas most reported that internship remuneration would encourage them more to work in Quebec's public sector. As such, the findings suggest that remuneration of psychology internships in Quebec would greatly improve doctoral students' sense of professional work morale, lessen students' financial burden associated with pursuing a doctoral degree, and help to facilitate a greater willingness for these students to work in Quebec's public health and education systems. To conclude, we discuss how remuneration of psychology internships could contribute to redress the pervasive shortage of psychologists in Quebec's public health care and education networks, together with other recommendations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with đź’™ for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.