Lonigan C J, Elbert J C, Johnson S B
Department of Psychology, Florida State University, Tallahassee 32306-1270, USA.
J Clin Child Psychol. 1998 Jun;27(2):138-45. doi: 10.1207/s15374424jccp2702_1.
Discusses issues related to the identification of psychosocial interventions for children that have demonstrated efficacy. Recent debate concerning differences between clinical trials research and clinical practice is summarized, including the tradeoff between interpretability (internal validity) and generalizability (external validity) of outcome studies. This article serves as an introduction to the special issue containing articles that have as their focus the identification of empirically supported psychosocial interventions for children as part of a task force. The article provides an overview of the history, agenda, and methodology used by the task force to define and identify specific empirically supported interventions for children with specific disorders. Whereas a number of well-established or probably efficacious interventions are identified within the series, more work directed at closing the gap between research and practice is needed.
讨论了与已证明有效的儿童心理社会干预措施的识别相关的问题。总结了近期关于临床试验研究与临床实践差异的争论，包括结果研究在可解释性（内部效度）和可推广性（外部效度）之间的权衡。本文作为特刊的引言，该特刊中的文章聚焦于作为一个特别工作组任务一部分的、经实证支持的儿童心理社会干预措施的识别。本文概述了该特别工作组用于定义和识别针对特定障碍儿童的特定经实证支持的干预措施的历史、议程和方法。尽管在该系列中确定了一些成熟的或可能有效的干预措施，但仍需要开展更多工作以缩小研究与实践之间的差距。
