The results are consistent with findings from previous reviews of interagency collaboration across adult and child services: there were some indications of benefit; and facilitating and inhibiting factors involved working relationships and multi-agency processes, resources and management. The identification of these factors has implications for practitioners, service managers, trainers, commissioners and researchers.
Background: Levels of goal agreement between therapists and adult clients have been shown to relate to therapeutic outcomes. Understanding clients' goals for therapy, therefore, is an important area of study. Aims: The purpose of this study was to investigate the therapeutic goals that young people have in school-based counselling, and the extent to which different types of goals are achieved. Method: The study is a post-hoc analysis of data collected from two pilot randomised controlled trials (RCT) using the Goal Based Outcome (GBO) tool, in which 73 participants were allocated to either a counselling group or a waitlist control group. Thematic analysis was used to identify the main types of goals young people had; with descriptive quantitative analysis to identify the prevalence of these goals, and multi-level analysis to identify whether some goals were attained to a greater extent than others. Results: The most frequent type of goals identified by young people related to increasing self-confidence and self-acceptance, followed by controlling or reducing anger, improving relationships with family, and increasing feelings of happiness. No significant relationship was found between the type of goal and the extent to which they were attained in counselling. Conclusion: Young people in counselling are particularly concerned with improving their self-confidence, and this suggests a somewhat different focus to the counselling work than that which emerges from counsellors' reports of presenting and predominant issues. This suggests that school-based counsellors should be mindful of clients' particular therapeutic goals
Aim
The purpose of this study was to replicate and extend a pilot evaluation of the effectiveness of school‐based humanistic counselling for psychological distress in young people.
Method
Data were available on 32 young people who were randomised to either school‐based humanistic counselling or waiting list conditions for one school term. The primary outcome measure was of psychological distress using the Young Person's CORE (YP‐CORE), at six and 12 weeks post‐assessment. Secondary measures at these time‐points were of psychological difficulties, self‐esteem, levels of depression, and attainment of personal goals; with longitudinal evaluation of outcomes at six months post‐assessment.
Results
On the primary outcome measure, participants who received counselling were significantly less distressed at six weeks than those in the waiting list group but not at 12 weeks, with effect sizes (Cohen's d) of 0.59 and 0.39 respectively. Reductions in psychological distress were maintained at follow‐up.
Discussion
Although the present findings, in isolation, are equivocal, they contribute to a body of evidence that supports the effectiveness of school‐based humanistic counselling. However, the principal lesson learnt from this study was the need for rigorous training of researchers, counsellors and pastoral care teachers to ensure adherence to protocols.
School-based humanistic counselling can be an effective means of reducing the psychological distress experienced by young people with emotional symptoms in the short term. The short-term effectiveness of school-based humanistic counselling is not limited to young people of a White ethnicity. There is no evidence that school-based humanistic counselling has effects beyond the end of therapy.
BackgroundHealth guidelines are developed to improve patient care by ensuring the most recent and ‘best available evidence’ is used to guide treatment recommendations. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's (NICE's ) guideline development methodology acknowledges that evidence needed to answer one question (treatment efficacy) may be different from evidence needed to answer another (cost‐effectiveness, treatment acceptability to patients). This review uses counselling in the treatment of depression as a case study, and interrogates the constructs of ‘best’ evidence and ‘best’ guideline methodologies.MethodThe review comprises six sections: (i) implications of diverse definitions of counselling in research; (ii) research findings from meta‐analyses and randomised controlled trials (RCTs); (iii) limitations to trials‐based evidence; (iv) findings from large routine outcome datasets; (v) the inclusion of qualitative research that emphasises service‐user voices; and (vi) conclusions and recommendations.ResultsResearch from meta‐analyses and RCTs contained in the draft 2018 NICE Guideline is limited but positive in relation to the effectiveness of counselling in the treatment for depression. The weight of evidence suggests little, if any, advantage to cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) over counselling once risk of bias and researcher allegiance are taken into account. A growing body of evidence from large NHS data sets also evidences that, for depression, counselling is as effective as CBT and cost‐effective when delivered in NHS settings.ConclusionSpecifications in NICE's updated guideline procedures allow for data other than RCTs and meta‐analyses to be included. Accordingly, there is a need to include large standardised collected data sets from routine practice as well as the voice of patients via high‐quality qualitative research.
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.