User:Shotwell/Attachment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< User:Shotwell

[edit] User:Shotwell/Attachment

Here's a beginning list of items to add to Child psychotherapy, or make a separate article with.

DIR

Parent-Child Interaction Therapy

Theraplay

DDP

Circle of Security

I had been thinking in terms of going on with the separate Attachment Therapy article when we can, but why not add it along with these? Jean Mercer 21:58, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

'Watch, wait and wonder' (Cohen et al, 1999)

manipulation of sensitive responsiveness, (van den Boom 1994 and 1995)

modified 'Interaction Guidance' (Benoit et al, 2001)

'Preschool Parent Psychotherapy' (Toth et al, 2002)

Not sure all of these warrant a separate article though. Not sure including them in 'attachment therapy' is the right thing. People don't seem to call the real stuff 'attachment therapy'.Fainites ^barley 22:43, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Alicia Lieberman ("Parent-child Psychotherapy")

Mary Dozier (autonomous states of mind)

Daniel Schechter (intergenerational communication of trauma)

Joy Osofsky ("Safe Start Initiative")

feel free to delete any of these. They're gleaned from the various attachment pages. Fainites ^barley 23:29, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

No, I don't think it makes sense to have any of them have separate articles-- that's why I suggested that we might add them to the Child Psychotherapy article. That would also get rid of the "are they attachment therapy" problem.

We do need to establish criteria for the levels of evidence. E.g., the Osofsky method-- this is announced as evidence-based, but it does not involve a randomized design, and in fact it's the judge who decided whether people should go into the program or not. So, I would say this could be called evidence-supported, but not evidence-based. I have a proposed set of categories based on trying to take the best from four taxonomies-- will provide these if asked nicely, or at least if no one shouts at me for doing it. Jean Mercer 14:35, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

If the categories aren't yet published, does that mean we can't use them? Surely the restriction to verifiable material doesn't apply to choice of approaches? But perhaps we could just summarize the methodology for each treatment study, and leave the reader to figure it out.Jean Mercer 14:37, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Do you mean this is your idea for four categories? Not yet published? I don't think we can use them if they're not published and generally accepted. Could you hurry up and publish it, because the standard 'evidence based' is very high. There is a tendancy amongst some editors to deride everything that has not achieved 'evidence based' status as quackery which can't be right. Its all very expensive and difficult. There must be lots of modest little therapies with a sensible theoretical base quietly trotting along doing no harm that have little prospect of achieving 'evidence based' status. I suppose this is what Saunders et al were trying to do.Fainites ^barley 22:14, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I just revised it and sent it back to Scott Lilienfeld. But it will still be awhile... anyway, there's a lot of disagreement about whether a sensible theoretical base means anything! (On the other hand, a non-sensible theoretical base certainly tells you something.)

What we could do is simply describe the nature of the supporting research for each treatment. We don't have to declare it to be evidence-based or whatever-- in fact one of the big points about evaluating interventions is that you can get new information that you need to use, to change the classification that was previously given. It's all pretty fluid, but that would be the beauty of Wiki for this kind of thing, you just watch the journals and stick in new info as it comes along.

There are other points that can be included for each treatment-- how long it's been in use; how many times it comes up in PsycINFO; published comments, reviews of books, etc.Jean Mercer 22:51, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

It's five categories, drawn from four suggested taxonomies or evaluative techniques, plus the work of my own busy keyboard. Jean Mercer 22:54, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I suppose then for the moment we're stuck with current accepted definitions of 'evidence based' (used sparingly) and a referral to the EBT page which contains the broader discussion, or descriptions of what evidential support there is. Much as has been done with DDP I suppose. Fainites ^barley 12:44, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Where's my head! I forgot to put ABA on the list.Jean Mercer 17:41, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

There's an article on ABA at Applied behavior analysis.Fainites ^barley 17:53, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm starting a proper list below as we've made Shotwells page a little messy. Fainites ^barley 17:59, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] outline for each treatment

I suggest that each of these items be covered for each intervention, if possible:

1. Targeted population (diagnosis or other characteristics like age limits) 2. Related diagnostic methods 3. Description of intervention, including scheduling 4. Training or other characteristics of practitioners 5. Place of treatment-- home, office, residential program 6. Theoretical basis 7. Supportive research 8. Adverse events 9. Professional reviews and published comments 10. Medicaid and private insurance coverage

Covering the same topics for all interventions makes it possible for readers to compare them easily. Also, anyone who wants to can usefully add to information on a topic, without creating chaos.Jean Mercer 16:20, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah. Mr Refrigerator Mother. Fainites ^barley 17:00, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

So is this all going to be in Child Psychotherapy ie a brief overview of the lot? Then the more important or perhaps notorious ones have their own articles. Fainites ^barley 17:04, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, that was my idea, as a way to establish a context within which any child psychotherapy could be considered. If you get my drift...Jean Mercer 17:31, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I do notice that most of the existing articles omit to cover some of the points i listed above.Jean Mercer 17:33, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Well now we have a Plan. Fainites ^barley 19:30, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

All we need is a Man and a Canal, or about 6 weeks worth of full-time work. Jean Mercer 19:38, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll have a bit more free time in the coming weeks as the new semester settles into routine, so I'll soon be able to help with the effort. shotwell 09:53, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I've got a few things to do too, but I'm getting together material.Jean Mercer 13:16, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

By the way, I notice that the Cochrane Collaboration is focusing attention on adverse events, how to identify them and how to report them, so I think we're on the right road with that-- even though, thank goodness, most of these interventions will not have had any. Still, it's important for readers to be reminded that harm is possible.Jean Mercer 13:19, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

We ought to give some thought to title, disambiguation and redirects aswell, because over here 'psychotherapy' is a much less broad term and mainly relates to therapies coming from the psychoanalytic tradition, as opposed to behavioural therapies. I think its a much broader term in the US. Fainites ^barley 10:28, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmm hmm hmm. Can you suggest something that works cross-Atlantically? It is very broad here and would include everything except pharmaceutical or surgical treatment-- the only kind of intervention that might have an ambiguous assignment is the kind with physical features like EMDR.Jean Mercer 16:58, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

We might be able to work it with redirects and a disambiguation page and an explanatory first paragraph. Certainly 'Child Psychotherapy' seems to mean you've done psychoanalysis. Anything else is 'therapy'. We could call it 'Child Psychotherapy/Therapy'. (It is gradually changing by the way, but the average reader won't know that!)Fainites ^barley 23:28, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand "done psychoanalysis". You mean it's no longer included, or that it's already been considered, or that it's different from therapy?Jean Mercer 15:10, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Over here, to be a 'child psychotherapist' you have to have done (been through) psychoanalysis, or at least that certainly was the case recently. Being a therapist is different. If you look at the existing Child psychotherapy article you will see that its based on psychoanalysis. As I say, it seems to be gradually changing which is why we may be able to solve the problem with redirects and a clear explanation. I'll have look round Gross to see the state of current terminology. Fainites ^barley 08:22, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Gross says "The term 'psychotherapy' is sometimes used to refer to all psychological treatments (as opposed to biological or somatic ones)........'Psychotherapy' .... is also used to refer to those methods based directly or indirectly on Freuds psychoanalysis.....In the UK the the tradition has been to contrast psychotherapy with behaviour therapy, while in the USA psychotherapy is used more broadly to include behavioural psychotherapy as well as 'psychodynamic therapy'." He also says "Child Psychotherapy is a specialism in its own right" but rather unhelpfully does not go on to define it in anyway. My experience with those doing 'child psychotherapy' is that it is psychoanalysis based. Overall I think we could call it either Child Therapy or Child Psychotherapy and then redirect the other to the same page. We could then have a brief explanatory passage at the beginning to explain the different use of termiinology and explain that the article covers the whole field. What do you think? Fainites ^barley 12:36, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I also think we could move this discussion onto the Child psychotherapy talkpage. Some other editors will hopefully join in. Fainites ^barley 12:38, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List

DIR - Stanley Greenspan

Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (is this the right one?) {PCIT, yes} (No, the PCIA-II is not the same as the PCIT, the PCIA-II is an assessment that has been adapted for treatment. The PCIT is a type of treatment. Both involve parent-child interaction and have similar names but were designed by different people and involve different procedures.

Theraplay - Jernberg

DDP - Hughes

Circle of Security - Marvin [[1]][2]

Applied behavior analysis - B. F. Skinner, Ivar Lovaas

Watch, wait and wonder' (Cohen et al, 1999)

manipulation of sensitive responsiveness, (van den Boom 1994 and 1995)

modified 'Interaction Guidance' (Benoit et al, 2001)

Preschool Parent Psychotherapy (Toth et al, 2002)

Parent-child Psychotherapy - Alicia Lieberman

Parent-infant psychotherapy ?

MBKT

Autonomous states of mind - Mary Dozier