Kendall P C, Sheldrick R C
Department of Psychology, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19122, USA.
J Consult Clin Psychol. 2000 Oct;68(5):767-73.
Normative comparisons are a procedure for evaluating the clinical significance of therapeutic interventions. Although a step-by-step statistical methodology for conducting normative comparisons has been reported elsewhere (P. C. Kendall, A. Marrs-Garcia, S. R. Nath, & R. C. Sheldrick, 1999), questions regarding the collecting of normative data remain. For this study, all treatment outcome studies published in the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology from 1988 to 1997 were examined and reviewed, and the 5 most commonly used outcome measures were identified. For these outcome measures, multiple sources of normative data were located. Although we identified a dearth of normative data on measures used for treatment outcome, results discussed here nevertheless provide information that may be of use to therapy outcome evaluators when conducting normative comparisons. In addition, equations to determine the minimum sample size needed in a normative sample for a given treatment outcome study are provided.
规范比较是一种评估治疗干预临床意义的程序。尽管在其他地方已经报道了进行规范比较的逐步统计方法（P.C.肯德尔、A.马尔斯-加西亚、S.R.纳特和R.C.谢德里克，1999），但关于规范数据收集的问题仍然存在。在本研究中，我们对1988年至1997年发表在《咨询与临床心理学杂志》上的所有治疗结果研究进行了检查和回顾，并确定了5种最常用的结果测量方法。对于这些结果测量方法，找到了多个规范数据来源。尽管我们发现用于治疗结果测量的规范数据匮乏，但此处讨论的结果仍然为治疗结果评估者在进行规范比较时提供了可能有用的信息。此外，还提供了用于确定给定治疗结果研究的规范样本所需最小样本量的公式。
