referred to as“empirically validated treatments,”
later discussed as “empirically supported treat-
ments,” and now more broadly referred to as
“evidence-based treatments,” these criteria have
been used in many research studies to help deter-
mine whether certain therapeutic approaches may
be especially useful for reducing mental health
symptoms. These criteria have been adapted over
the years, but the basic framework remains intact.
Therapeutic approaches are categorized as“Well
Established,”“Probably Efficacious,”and“Exper-
imental”or“Possibly Efficacious.”Over time, less
emphasis has been placed upon the use of manuals
to guide treatment, but the need for internal valid-
ity and consistency in how treatments are admin-
istered remains.
A recent example of a meta-analysis (i.e., a sta-
tistical examination of multiple studies combined;
discussed in more detail below) offers a good exam-
ple of work done to examine evidence-based treat-
ments as compared to others. In 2006, John Weisz,
Amanda Jensen-Doss, and Kristin Hawley com-
bined the results from 32 clinical trials that had
been conducted to understand the effects of psy-
chotherapy with youth. In each of these clinical
trials, an evidence-based therapeutic approach was
compared to an alternate approach (i.e., “usual
care”). Their study allowed for an examination of
therapy efficacy and effectiveness, as some of the
studies that were examined involved typical care
in a usual setting and some involved a therapy
that was administered in a research lab. TheseT A B L E 11-1 Criteria for Empirically Validated Treatments
Well-Established Treatments
I. At least two good group design studies, conducted by different investigators, demonstrating efficacy inone or
more of the following ways:
A. Superior to pill or psychological placebo or to another treatment.
B. Equivalent to an already established treatment in studies with adequate statistical power (about 30 per group;
cf. Kazdin & Bass, 1989).
OR
II. A large series of single case design studies demonstrating efficacy. These studies must have:
A. Used good experimental designs and
B. Compared the intervention to another treatment as in I.A.
FURTHER CRITERIA FOR BOTH I AND II:
III. Studies must be conducted with treatment manuals.
IV. Characteristics of the client samples must be clearly specified.
Probably Efficacious Treatments
I. Two studies showing the treatment is more effective than a waiting-list control group.
OR
II. Two studies otherwise meeting the well-established treatment criteria I, III, and IV, but both are conducted by the
same investigator. Or one good study demonstrating effectiveness by these same criteria.
OR
III. At least two good studies demonstrating effectiveness but flawed by heterogeneity of the client samples.
OR
IV. A small series of single case design studies otherwise meeting the well-established treatment criteria II, III, and IV.
Experimental Treatments
Treatment not yet tested in trials meeting task force criteria for methodology.
SOURCE: Chambless, D. L., Baker, M., Baucom, D. H., Beutler, L. E., Calhoun, K. S., et al. (1998). Update on empirically validated therapies, II.Clinical Psy-
chologist, 51(1), 3–16.
316 CHAPTER 11