Who should receive subsidized psychotherapy?: Analysis of decision makers' think-aloud protocols

Qualitative Health Research

Volumn 12, Issue 5, 2002, Pages 640-654

  Fredelius, Gunilla ^a,b   Sandell, Rolf ^b   Lindqvist, Cecilia ^a  

^a STOCKHOLM COUNTY COUNCIL   (Sweden)

^b LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACUTE DISEASE; ARTICLE; CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; CONFLICT; DECISION MAKING; ECONOMICS; EVALUATION; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HUMAN; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PATIENT REFERRAL; PATIENT SELECTION; PSYCHOTHERAPY; STANDARD; SWEDEN;

ACUTE DISEASE; CLINICAL PROTOCOLS; CONFLICT (PSYCHOLOGY); DECISION MAKING; HEALTH PRIORITIES; HUMANS; PATIENT SELECTION; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; PSYCHOTHERAPY; REFERRAL AND CONSULTATION; STATE MEDICINE; SWEDEN;

EID: 0036581316     PISSN: 10497323     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/104973202129120151     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Aanstoos, C. M. (1983). The think aloud method in descriptive research. Journal ofPhenomenological Psychology, 14,243-266.
2. Crits-Christoph, P., & Connolly, M. B. (1993). Patient pretreatment predictors of outcome. In N. E. Miller, L. Luborsky, ]. P. Barber, & J. P. Docherty (Eds.), Psychodynamic pretreatment research: A handbook for clinical practice (pp. 177-190). New York: Basic Books.
3. Cullberg, J.(1995). Alt prioritera for psykoterapi [Prioritizing for psychotherapy]. Stockholm: Stockholm County Council, Health and Sickness Administration Staff.
4. Duncker, K. (1926). A qualitative (experimental and theoretical) study of productive thinking (solving comprehensible problems). Pedagogical Seminar, 33,642-708.
5. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1998). How to study thinking in everyday life: Contrasting think-aloud protocols with descriptions and explanations of thinking. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 5,178-186.
6. Fielding, N. G., & Fielding,]. L. (1986). Linking data. Tlie articulation ofqualitatiz'e and quantitative methods in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
7. Garfield, S. (1994). Research on client variables in psychotherapy. In A. Bergin & S. Garfield (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behaviour change (4th éd., pp. 190-228). New York: VViley.
8. Garfinkel, H. (1984). Studies in etlinoinetliodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. (Orginal work published 1967)
9. Hoglend, P. (1993). Suitability for brief dynamic psychotherapy: Psychodynamic variables as predictors of outcome. Ada Psychiatrica Scandinavia, 88,104-110.
10. Karlsson, E., Olin, C., Rutberg, H., & Söderlind, K. (1996-97). Politiker Profession Prioritering. Ett prioriteringsprojekt i Sydöstra sjiikrardsregionen inom hjartkirurgi [Politicians, profession, prioritization. A prioritization project in the region within cardiothoracic surgery]. Linköping, Sweden: Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University Hospital.
11. Luborsky, L., Crits-Christoph, P., Mintz, J., & Auerbach, A. (1988). Who will benefit from psychotherapy? New York: Basic Books.
12. Norcross, J. C., & Beutler, L. E. (1997). Determining the therapeutic relationship of choice in brief therapy. In J. N. Butcher (Ed.), Personality assessment in managed health care. Using the MMPI-2 in treatment planning (pp. 42-60). New York: Oxford University Press.
13. Piper, W. E., Azim, H. F., McCallum, M, & Joyce, A. S. (1990). Patient suitability and outcome in shortterm individual psychotherapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 58,475-481.
14. Priorities in Health Care. (1996, October). Final programme 1st International Conference on Priorities in Health Care, Stockholm, Sweden.
15. Ryynaenen, O. P., Myllykangas, M., Kinnunen, J., & Takala, J. (1999). Attitudes to health care prioritisation methods and criteria among nurses, doctors, politicians and the general public. Social Science & Medicine, 49,1529-1539.
16. Sandell, R., & Fredelius, G. (1995). Prioritering av patienter for psykoterapi-en statistisk analys [Prioritization of patients for psychotherapy - a statistical analysis] (Psykoterapi: Forskning och Utveckling, nr 1). Stockholm: Institutionen for Psykoterapi Karolinska institutet och Psykoterapiinstitutet Stockholms läns landsting.
17. Sandell, R., & Fredelius, G. (1997). Prioritizing among patients seeking subsidized psychotherapy. Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy, 11,73-86.
18. Sandell, R., Fredelius, G., & Schubert, J. (1997). Prioritering-en konflikt mellan olika intressen: En empirisk Studie av prioriteringsbeslut i vârden [Prioritization-conflict between interests: An empirical study of prioritization decision-making in health care]. Lakarlidningen, 94,981-985.
19. Schmueli, A. (1999). Survival vs. quality of life: A study of the Israeli public priorities in medical care. Social Science & Medicine, 49,297-302.
20. Slade, M. (1996). Assessing the need of the severely mentally ill: Cultural and professional differences. International Journal of Social Psycliiatry, 42,1-9.
21. Slade, M., Powell, R., & Strathdee, G. (1997). Current approaches to identifying the severely mentally ill. Social Psycliiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 32,177-184
22. Smagorinsky, P. (1994). Think aloud protocol analysis: Beyond the black box. In P. Smagorinsky (Ed.), Speaking about writing - reflections on research methodology (pp. 3-19). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23. Socialdepartementet. (1995). Vårdens svåra val. [Hard choices in health care] Slutbetänkande av prioriteringsutredningen. SOU, 5. Stockholm: Regeringskansliets forvaltningsavdelning.
24. Steketee, G., & Chambless, D. L. (1992). Methodological issues in prediction of treatment outcome. Clinical Psychology Revieiv, 12,387-400.
25. Truant, G. S. (1998). Assessment of suitability for psychotherapy. I. Introduction and the assessment process. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 52,397-411.
26. Truant, G. S. (1999). Assessment of suitability for psychotherapy. II. Assessment based on basic process goals. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 53,17-34.
27. Witteman, C, & Koele, P. (1999). Explaining treatment decisions. Psychotherapy Research, 9,100-114.
28. Zimmerman, D. H. (1970). The practicalities of rule use. In J. D. Douglas (Ed.), Understanding everyday life (pp. 221-238). London: Routledge Kegan Paul.