• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

应用行为分析(ABA)治疗技术有效性研究中的安慰剂组

Placebo Groups in Research on the Effectiveness of ABA Therapeutic Techniques.

作者信息

Bąbel Przemysław, Bajcar Elżbieta Anita, Marchewka Katarzyna, Sikora Katarzyna

机构信息

Pain Research Group, Institute of Psychology, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.

Institute of Psychology, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.

出版信息

Front Psychol. 2018 Oct 18;9:1899. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01899. eCollection 2018.

DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01899
PMID:30459666
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6232887/
Abstract

Behavior analysts have shown that a single-subject experimental design (SSED) is a useful tool for identifying the effectiveness of specific therapeutic techniques, whereas researchers outside applied behavior analysis (ABA) maintain that randomized placebo-controlled trials (RPCT) provide the most definite test of efficacy. In this paper the possible benefits that could result from supporting SSED studies by placebo control groups are discussed. However, the use of placebo groups in psychotherapy research arouses considerable controversy and many researchers argue against it. The main aim of this paper is to clarify theoretical and methodological problems associated with using placebo groups in psychotherapy research and to demonstrate that these problems can be solved if the assumptions on which they are based are reformulated. The article also discusses ethical issues about the use of placebo groups in research on the effectiveness of psychotherapy.

摘要

行为分析师表明,单受试者实验设计(SSED)是确定特定治疗技术有效性的有用工具,而应用行为分析(ABA)领域之外的研究人员则认为随机安慰剂对照试验(RPCT)能提供最确切的疗效测试。本文讨论了通过安慰剂对照组支持SSED研究可能带来的益处。然而,在心理治疗研究中使用安慰剂组引发了相当大的争议,许多研究人员对此表示反对。本文的主要目的是阐明心理治疗研究中使用安慰剂组相关的理论和方法问题,并表明如果重新阐述其基于的假设,这些问题是可以解决的。本文还讨论了在心理治疗有效性研究中使用安慰剂组的伦理问题。

相似文献

1
Placebo Groups in Research on the Effectiveness of ABA Therapeutic Techniques.应用行为分析(ABA)治疗技术有效性研究中的安慰剂组
Front Psychol. 2018 Oct 18;9:1899. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01899. eCollection 2018.
2
What makes placebo-controlled trials unethical?安慰剂对照试验为何不道德?
Am J Bioeth. 2002 Spring;2(2):3-9. doi: 10.1162/152651602317533523.
3
Placebo effect and randomized clinical trials.
Theor Med. 1995 Jun;16(2):171-82. doi: 10.1007/BF00998543.
4
Placebo-controlled trials in psychiatric research: an ethical perspective.精神病学研究中的安慰剂对照试验:伦理视角
Biol Psychiatry. 2000 Apr 15;47(8):707-16. doi: 10.1016/s0006-3223(00)00833-7.
5
Introduction to the special issue on the placebo concept in psychotherapy.心理治疗中安慰剂概念特刊引言
J Clin Psychol. 2005 Jul;61(7):787-90. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20125.
6
Basic problems in controlled trials.对照试验中的基本问题。
J Med Ethics. 1983 Jun;9(2):80-4. doi: 10.1136/jme.9.2.80.
7
Active placebo control groups of pharmacological interventions were rarely used but merited serious consideration: a methodological overview.药物干预的活性安慰剂对照组很少使用,但值得认真考虑:方法学概述。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Jul;87:35-46. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.03.001. Epub 2017 Mar 22.
8
Addressing risk of bias in trials of cognitive behavioral therapy.解决认知行为疗法试验中的偏倚风险。
Shanghai Arch Psychiatry. 2015 Jun 25;27(3):144-8. doi: 10.11919/j.issn.1002-0829.215042.
9
Contemporary psychotherapy research: implications for substance misuse treatment and research.当代心理治疗研究:对物质滥用治疗与研究的启示
Subst Use Misuse. 2009;44(1):42-61. doi: 10.1080/10826080802523228.
10
Randomised placebo-controlled trials of surgery: ethical analysis and guidelines.手术的随机安慰剂对照试验:伦理分析与指南
J Med Ethics. 2016 Dec;42(12):776-783. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2015-103333. Epub 2016 Oct 24.

本文引用的文献

1
The ethics of placebo-controlled trials: methodological justifications.安慰剂对照试验的伦理:方法学依据。
Contemp Clin Trials. 2013 Nov;36(2):510-4. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2013.09.003. Epub 2013 Sep 12.
2
Single-subject experimental design for evidence-based practice.基于证据的实践的单案例实验设计。
Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2012 Nov;21(4):397-414. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360(2012/11-0036). Epub 2012 Oct 15.
3
Evidence-based therapy relationships: research conclusions and clinical practices.循证治疗关系:研究结论与临床实践。
Psychotherapy (Chic). 2011 Mar;48(1):98-102. doi: 10.1037/a0022161.
4
Enhancing the scientific credibility of single-case intervention research: randomization to the rescue.增强单病例干预研究的科学可信度:随机化来拯救。
Psychol Methods. 2010 Jun;15(2):124-44. doi: 10.1037/a0017736.
5
The selection and design of control conditions for randomized controlled trials of psychological interventions.心理干预随机对照试验对照条件的选择与设计
Psychother Psychosom. 2009;78(5):275-84. doi: 10.1159/000228248. Epub 2009 Jul 11.
6
Placebo versus best-available-therapy control group in clinical trials for pharmacologic therapies: which is better?在药物治疗的临床试验中,安慰剂组与最佳可用治疗对照组:哪一个更好?
Proc Am Thorac Soc. 2007 Oct 1;4(7):570-3. doi: 10.1513/pats.200706-073JK.
7
Should the single subject design be regarded as a valid alternative to the randomised controlled trial?
Postgrad Med J. 2005 Sep;81(959):546-7. doi: 10.1136/pgmj.2004.031641.
8
A review of reinforcement control procedures.强化控制程序综述。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2005 Summer;38(2):257-78. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2005.176-03.
9
Internet survey of treatments used by parents of children with autism.针对自闭症儿童家长所采用治疗方法的网络调查。
Res Dev Disabil. 2006 Jan-Feb;27(1):70-84. doi: 10.1016/j.ridd.2004.12.002.
10
A critique of clinical equipoise. Therapeutic misconception in the ethics of clinical trials.对临床 equipoise 的批判。临床试验伦理中的治疗性误解。
Hastings Cent Rep. 2003 May-Jun;33(3):19-28.