Table 2.
Workgroup criteria for identification of empirically supported therapies (source: Chambless and Ollendick, 2001).
| DIVISION 12 TASK FORCE CRITERIA (CHAMBLESS ET AL., 1998), GROUP A |
| Well-established treatments |
| I. At least two good between-group design experiments must demonstrate efficacy in one or more of the following ways: |
| A. Superiority to pill or psychotherapy placebo, or to other treatment |
| B. Equivalence to already established treatment with adequate sample sizes |
| OR |
| II. A large series of single-case design experiments must demonstrate efficacy with |
| A. Use of good experimental design and |
| B. Comparison of intervention to another treatment |
| III. Experiments must be conducted with treatment manuals or equivalent clear description of treatment |
| IV. Characteristics of samples must be specified |
| V. Effects must be demonstrated by at least two different investigators or teams |
| Probably efficacious treatments |
| I. Two experiments must show that the treatment is superior to waiting-list control group |
| OR |
| II. One or more experiments must meet well-established criteria IA or IB, III, and IV above but V is not met |
| OR |
| III. A small series of single-case design experiments must meet well-established-treatment criteria |
| Experimental treatments |
| Treatment not yet tested in trials meeting task force criteria for methodology |
| SPECIAL SECTION OF JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC PSYCHOLOGY (SPIRITO, 1999) CRITERIA, GROUP B |
| Well-established treatments |
| Same as Chambless et al. (1998) |
| Probably efficacious treatments |
| Same as Chambless et al. (1998) |
| Promising interventions |
| I. There must be positive support from one well-controlled study and at least one other less-well-controlled study |
| OR |
| II. There must be positive support from a small number of single-case design experiments |
| OR |
| III. There must be positive support from two or more well controlled studies by the same investigator |
| SPECIAL SECTION OF JOURNAL OF CLINICAL CHILD PSYCHOLOGY (1998, VOL. 27, NO. 2) CRITERIA, GROUP C |
| Well-established treatments |
| Same as Chambless et al. (1998) |
| Probably efficacious treatments |
| Same as Chambless et al. (1998) except: |
| There must be at least two, rather than one, group design studies meeting criteria for well-established treatments if conducted by the same investigator |
| SPECIAL SECTION OF JOURNAL OF CONSULTING AND CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY (KENDALL AND CHAMBLESS, 1998) CRITERIA, GROUP D |
| Efficacious and specific |
| Same as Chambless et al. (1998) for well-established treatments |
| Possibly efficacious and specific treatments |
| Same as efficacious and specific above except: Treatment only required to be found superior to rival treatment in one study |
| Efficacious and possibly specific treatments |
| Same as efficacious and specific criteria above except: Treatment was found superior to wait-list group in one study and superior to rival treatment in another study by a different team |
| Efficacious treatments |
| Same as Chambless et al. (1998) for well-established treatments except: Treatment must be demonstrated to be better than no treatment but not been shown to be better than non-specific intervention, placebo, or rival intervention |
| Possibly efficacious treatments |
| Same as Chambless et al. (1998) for probably efficacious treatments |
| WHAT WORKS FOR WHOM? (ROTH AND FONAGY, 1996) CRITERIA, GROUP E |
| Clearly effective treatments |
| I. There must be a replicated demonstration of superiority to a control condition or another treatment condition |
| OR |
| II. There must be a single high-quality randomized control trial in which: |
| A. Therapists followed a clearly described therapeutic method useable as the basis for training |
| B. There is a clearly described patient group |
| Promising limited-support treatments |
| Treatment must be innovative and a promising line of intervention |
| OR |
| Treatment is a widely practiced method with only limited support for effectiveness |
| A GUIDE TO TREATMENTS THAT WORK (NATHAN AND GORMAN, 1998) CRITERIA, GROUP F |
| Type 1 studies |
| I. Study must include a randomized prospective clinical trial |
| II. Study must include comparison groups with random assignment, blind assessments, clear inclusion and exclusion criteria, state-of-the-art diagnostic methods, and adequate sample size for power |
| III. There must be clearly described statistical methods |
| Type 2 studies |
| Clinical trials must be performed, but some traits of type-1 study were missing (e.g. trial with no double blind or group assignment not randomized) |
| Type 3 studies |
| I. These are open treatment studies that are aimed at obtaining pilot data |
| OR |
| II. These are case control studies in which treatment information was obtained retrospectively |
| TREATMENTS FOR OLDER ADULTS (GATZ ET AL., 1998) CRITERIA, GROUP G |
| Same as Chambless et al. (1998) criteria |
| TREATMENTS FOR CHRONIC PAIN (WILSON AND GIL, 1996) CRITERIA, GROUP H |
| Same as Chambless et al. (1998) criteria |