Recently, concern has arisen that meta-analyses overestimate the effects of psychological therapies and that those therapies may not work under clinically representative conditions. This meta-analysis of 90 studies found that therapies are effective over a range of clinical representativeness. The projected effects of an ideal study of clinically representative therapy are similar to effect sizes in past meta-analyses. Effects increase with larger dose and when outcome measures are specific to treatment. Some clinically representative studies used self-selected treatment clients who were more distressed than available controls, and these quasi-experiments underestimated therapy effects. This study illustrates the joint use of fixed and random effects models, use of pretest effect sizes to study selection bias in quasi-experiments, and use of regression analysis to project results to an ideal study in the spirit of response surface modeling.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shadish et al. (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: