Clinical science seems to have reached a tipping point. It appears that a new paradigm is beginning to emerge that is questioning the validity and utility of the medical illness model, which assumes that latent disease entities are targeted with specific therapy protocols. A new generation of evidence-based care has begun to move toward process-based therapies to target core mediators and moderators based on testable theories. This could represent a paradigm shift in clinical science with far-reaching implications. Clinical science might see a decline of named therapies defined by set technologies, a decline of broad schools, a rise of testable models, a rise of mediation and moderation studies, the emergence of new forms of diagnosis based on functional analysis, a move from nomothetic to idiographic approaches, and a move toward processes that specify modifiable elements. These changes could integrate or bridge different treatment orientations, settings, and even cultures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hofmann et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: