quote:
Lambert proposes using an intriguing actuarial model, in which the clients’ session-by-session data on outcome measures is entered into a computer program. Using a large database of client outcome data, the program is able to alert the therapist when the probability of client deterioration is high. In his book, Lambert cites a few studies that indicate promise with this method.
Understandably, many therapists will be loath to make clinical decisions based on a computer’s calculations. But then how else do we overcome our self-assessment bias and seriously deal with the risk of client deterioration?
This seemed like an exceptionally lame idea. How else do you overcome self assessment bias indeed.
I was actually surprised that the percentages of those who don't improve or deteriorate weren't higher. It seems like such a lot goes into a successful therapy-- has to be the "right" therapist, the "right" time, and the client has to be willing to do the (often draining, exhausting, and excruciating) work. I guess you get out of it what you put into it, but even for that the conditions have to be right.
I'm just rambling now. It was an interesting article-- thanks for sharing.