↓ Skip to main content

Can we predict failure in couple therapy early enough to enhance outcome?

Overview of attention for article published in Behaviour Research & Therapy, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Can we predict failure in couple therapy early enough to enhance outcome?
Published in
Behaviour Research & Therapy, December 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.brat.2014.12.015
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher A. Pepping, W. Kim Halford, Brian D. Doss

Abstract

Feedback to therapists based on systematic monitoring of individual therapy progress reliably enhances therapy outcome. An implicit assumption of therapy progress feedback is that clients unlikely to benefit from therapy can be detected early enough in the course of therapy for corrective action to be taken. To explore the possibility of using feedback of therapy progress to enhance couple therapy outcome, the current study tested whether weekly therapy progress could detect off-track clients early in couple therapy. In an effectiveness trial of couple therapy, 136 couples were monitored weekly on relationship satisfaction and an expert derived algorithm was used to attempt to predict eventual therapy outcome. As expected, the algorithm detected a significant proportion of couples who did not benefit from couple therapy at Session 3, but prediction was substantially improved at Session 4 so that eventual outcome was accurately predicted for 70% of couples, with little improvement of prediction thereafter. More sophisticated algorithms might enhance prediction accuracy, and a trial of the effects of therapy progress feedback on couple therapy outcome is needed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 4%
Unknown 22 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 26%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 17%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 3 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 70%
Unspecified 1 4%
Linguistics 1 4%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Unknown 4 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 January 2015.
All research outputs
#19,944,994
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Behaviour Research & Therapy
#2,404
of 2,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,399
of 359,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behaviour Research & Therapy
#31
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,672 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.5. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 359,548 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.