Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Routine Outcome Monitoring: ‘love it or leave it’?

  • Forum
  • Published:
Tijdschrift voor Psychotherapie

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Literatuur

  1. Carlier, I.V.E., Meuldijk, D., Vliet, I.M. van, Fenema, E. van, Wee, N.J.A. van der & Zitman F.G. 2012, Routine outcome monitoring and feedback on physical or mental health status: evidence and theory. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practive, 18, 104-110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hannan, C., Lambert, M.J., Harmon, C., Nielsen, S.L., Smart, D.W. & Shimokawa, K. (2005). A lab test and algorithms for identifying clients at risk for treatment failure. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 61, 155-163.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Harmon, C., Hawkins, E.J., Lambert, M.J., Slade, K. & Whipple, J.L. (2005). Improving outcomes for poorly responding clients: the use of clinical support tools and feedback to clients. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 61, 175-185. DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jclp.20109.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hatfield, D., McCullough, L., Frantz, S.H. & Krieger, K. (2010). Do we know when our clients get worse? An investigation of therapists’ ability to detect negative client change. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 17, 25-32. DOI 10.1002/cpp.656.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jong, K. de (2012). De rol van de behandelaar: de ‘vergeten’ factor in ROM. Tijdschrift voor Psychiatrie, 54,197-201.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jong, K. de, Sluis, P. van, Nugter, M.A., Heiser, W.J. & Spinhoven, P. (2012). Understanding the differential impact of outcome monitoring: Therapist variables that moderate feedback effects in a randomized clinical trial. Psychotherapy Research, 22, 464-474.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Katsikopolous, K.V., Pachur, T., MAchery, E. & Wallin, A. (2008). From Meehl to Fast and Frugal Heuristics (and Back). Theory & Psychology, 18, 443-464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kadera, S.W., Lambert, M.J. & Andrews, A.A. (1996). How much therapy is really enough? A session-by-session analysis of the psychotherapy dose-effect relationship. Journal of Psychotherapy Practice and Research, 5, 132-151.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Lambert, M.J. (2007). Presidential address: What we have learned from a decade of research aimed at improving psychotherapy outcome in routine care. Psychotherapy Research, 17,1-14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lambert, M.J., Hansen, N.B. & Finch, A.E. (2001). Patient-focused research: using patient outcome data to enhance treatment effects. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 69, 159-172.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Lambert,M.J.,Hansen,N.B.& Finch,A.E.(2001).Patient-focused research:using patient outcome data to enhance treatment effects. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 69, 159-172.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Lutz, W., Boehnke, J.R., Köck, K., Bitterman, A. (2011). Diagnostik und psychometrische Verlaufrückmeldungen im Rahmen eines Modellprojektes zur Qualitätssicherung in der ambulanten Psyhotherapie. Zeitschrift fur Klinsche Psychologie und Psychotherapie, 40, 283-297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Miller, S. D., Hubble, M., & Duncan, B. L. (2008). Supershrinks: What is the secret of their success? Psychotherapy in Australia, 14, 14-22.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Os, J. van, Kahn, R., Denys, D., Schoevers, R. A., Beekman, A. T. F., Hoogendijk, W. J. G. (2012). ROM: gedragsnorm of dwangmaatregel? Overwegingen bij het themanummer over routine outcome monitoring. Tijdschrift voor psychiatrie, 54, 245-253.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Shimokawa, K., Lambert, M.J. & Smart, D.W. (2010). Enhancing treatment outcome of patients at risk of treatment failure: Meta-analytic and mega-analytic review of a psychotherapy quality assurance system. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 298-311. DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0019247.

  16. Stulz, N., Lutz, W., Leach, C., Lucock, M. & Barkham, M. (2007). Shapes of early change in psychotherapy under routine outpatient conditions. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 75, 864-874.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universiteit van Leiden, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Kim de Jong

  2. Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Adriaan van ’t Spijker

Authors
  1. Kim de Jong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Adriaan van ’t Spijker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

is onderzoeker bij de, en psycholoog bij Psychologie La Croix te Amsterdam. Zij is redacteur van dit tijdschrift.

is docent bij het, en psychotherapeut in eigen praktijk te Schoonhoven. Hij is redacteur van dit tijdschrift.

About this article

Cite this article

de Jong, K., van ’t Spijker, A. Routine Outcome Monitoring: ‘love it or leave it’?. TIJDSCHRIFT PSYCHOTHERAPIE 39, 190–194 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12485-013-0032-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12485-013-0032-6

Search

Navigation