Persons J B, Silberschatz G
Center for Cognitive Therapy, University of California, San Francisco, USA.
J Consult Clin Psychol. 1998 Feb;66(1):126-35. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.66.1.126.
Two clinicians provided opposite answers to the title question: Persons argued that information from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is vital to clinicians, and Silberschatz argued that information from RCTs is irrelevant to clinicians. Persons argued that clinicians cannot provide top quality care to their patients without attending to findings of RCTs and that clinicians have an ethical responsibility to inform patients about, recommend, and provide treatments supported by RCTs before informing patients about, recommending, and providing treatments shown to be inferior in RCTs or not evaluated in RCTs. Silberschatz argued that RCTs do not and cannot answer questions that concern practicing clinicians. He advocates alternative research approaches (effectiveness studies, quasi-experimental methods, case-specific research) for studying psychotherapy.
珀森斯认为随机对照试验（RCT）的信息对临床医生至关重要，而西尔伯沙茨则认为RCT的信息与临床医生无关。珀森斯认为，临床医生如果不关注RCT的研究结果，就无法为患者提供高质量的护理，并且临床医生有道德责任在告知患者、推荐并提供RCT显示效果较差或未在RCT中评估的治疗方法之前，先告知患者、推荐并提供RCT支持的治疗方法。西尔伯沙茨认为，RCT没有也无法回答临床医生关心的问题。他提倡采用替代研究方法（有效性研究、准实验方法、针对具体病例的研究）来研究心理治疗。
