Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Observational Coding Training Methods for CBT Treatment Fidelity: A Systematic Review

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Cognitive Therapy and Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Observational coding is the gold standard for coding treatment fidelity in Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT). This method allows researchers to objectively assess therapist behaviors to determine if CBT was delivered as intended. However, there is no standard method or protocol that ensures reliability within and between research groups, compromising comparability between studies. The aim of this study was to evaluate procedures used to train raters to quantify CBT fidelity. A systematic review was conducted. PsycINFO and Web of Science databases were reviewed for articles up until July 2015; the parameters of the search included CBT, depression, treatment fidelity, and coding/rating. A total of 521 articles were screened for inclusion, which yielded 81 articles. Data was extracted across four categories (study characteristics, training process, inter-rater reliability, and rating), and 62 codes. The results revealed variability in training approaches (e.g., 25.9% of articles reported 10–50 h of training). Very little information was provided about the training process (i.e. only one study specified training duration). Training materials were: manuals (21.0%), videos (18.5%), audiotapes (2.4%), readings (1.2%), and lectures (1.2%). Almost all (90.1%) studies did not describe the trainer, and 28.4% did not describe raters. The relation between CBT fidelity and clinical outcomes is equivocal, perhaps because intra-team and inter-team reliability is difficult to achieve. This systematic review revealed variability in training others to rate CBT fidelity, of which some approaches might inform the field for future use.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. (Carroll et al. 2000 (Ref. in Supplemental File 3); Cissna et al. 1990; Guttman et al. 1971; Horn and Horn 1986; Hruschka et al. 2004; McLeod and Weisz 2005; Plumb and Vilardaga 2010; Samoilov et al. 2000; Sheidow et al. 2008; Waltz et al. 1993).

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge the following research assistants for their hard work in coding articles for this study: Paige Schultz, Madison Walker, Kayne Mettert, and Jasmine Shaffer.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Natalie Rodriguez-Quintana.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Natalie Rodriguez-Quintana and Cara C. Lewis declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (national and institutional). Informed consent was obtained from all individual subjects participating in the study.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rodriguez-Quintana, N., Lewis, C.C. Observational Coding Training Methods for CBT Treatment Fidelity: A Systematic Review. Cogn Ther Res 42, 358–368 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-018-9898-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-018-9898-5

Keywords

Navigation