One size does not fit all: Aptitude x treatment interaction (ATI) as a conceptual framework for complementary and alternative medicine outcome research. Part II - Research designs and their applications

Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 698-705

  Caspi, Opher ^a,b   Bell, Iris R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE; ARTICLE; METHODOLOGY; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

APTITUDE; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; COMPLEMENTARY THERAPIES; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE, INTEGRATED; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; PATIENT SELECTION; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; TAI JI; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 4444365066     PISSN: 10755535     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/1075553041829307     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Aguinis H. Statistical power problems with moderated multiple regression in management research. J Manage 1995;21:1141-1158.
2. Anderson, KW. Utility of the five-factor model of personality in psychotherapy aptitude-treatment interaction research. Psychother Res 1998;8:54-70.
3. Aronson E, Carlsmith JM. Experimentation in social psychology. In: Lindzey G, Carlsmith E eds. Handbook of Social Psychology, vol. 2, 2nd ed. Reading; MA; Addison-Wesley, 1968:1-79.
4. Bell IR, Caspi O, Schwartz GRE, Grant KL, Rychener D, Gaudet TW, Maizes V, Weil AT. Integrative medicine and systematic outcomes research: Issues in the emergence of a new model for primary health care. Arch Intern Med 2002;162:133-140.
5. Beutler LE. Have all won and must all have prizes? Revisiting Luborsky et al.'s verdict. J Consult Clin Psychology 1991;59: 226-232.
6. Bogden HE. Increased efficiency of selection resulting from replacement of a single predictor with several differential predictors. Educ Psychological Meas 1951;11:173-196.
7. Campbell D, Fiske DW. Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin 1959;56:81-105.
8. Cronbach LJ. Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. Am Psychologist 1975;30:116-126.
9. Cronbach LJ. Designing evaluations of educational and social programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1982.
10. Cronbach LJ, Snow RE. Aptitude and Instructional Methods: A handbook for Research on Interactions. New York: Irvington, 1977.
11. Dance KA, Neufeld RWJ. Aptitude-treatment interaction research in the clinical setting: A review of attempts to dispel the "patient uniformity" myth. Psychological Bull 1988;104:192-213.
12. Edwards AL, Cronbach LJ. Experimental design for research in psychotherapy. J Clin Psychology 1952;8:51-59.
13. Eisenberg JM. Globalize the evidence, localize the decisions: Evidence-based medicine and the international diversity. Health Affairs 2002;21:166-168.
14. Figueredo AJ, Brooks A, Leff HS, Sechrest, L. A meta-analytic approach to growth curve analysis. Psychological Reports 2002; 87:441-465.
15. Gangestad S, Snyder M. "To carve nature at its joints": On the existence of discrete classes in personality. Psychological Rev 1985;92:317-349.
16. Garfield SL, Bergin AE, eds. Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change, 3rd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1986.
17. Haynes RB, Devereaux PJ, and Guyatt GH. Physicians' and patients' choices in evidence based practice: Evidence does not make decisions, people do. BMJ 2002;324:1350.
18. Hollon SD, DeRubeis RJ, Shelton RC, Weiss B. The emperor's new drugs: Effect size and moderation effects. Prevent Treat 2002;5:Article 28. Online documental: www.journals.apa.org/prevention/volume25/pre0050028c.html; accessed July 20, 2004.
19. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press 2001.
20. Jonas WB. The evidence house: How to build an inclusive base for complementary medicine. Western J Med 2001;175:79-80.
21. Kirsch I, Moore TJ, Scoboria A, Nicholls SS. The emperor's new drugs: An analysis of antidepressant medication data submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Prev Treat 2002;5: Article 23. Online document at: www.journals.apa.org/prevention/volume25/pre-0050023a.html; accessed July 20, 2004.
22. Lambert MF and Wood J. Incorporating patient preferences into randomized trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2000;53:163-166.
23. Leuchter AF, Cook IA, Witte EA, Morgan M, Abrams M. Changes in brain function of depressed subjects during treatment with placebo. Am J Psychiatry 2002;159:122-129.
24. Petitti DB. Meta-Analysis, Decision Analysis and Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Methods for Quantitative Synthesis in Medicine, 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.
25. Ribeiro SC, Tandon R, Grunhaus L, Greden JF. The DST as a predictor of outcome in depression: A meta-analysis. Am J Psychiatry 1993;150:1618-1629.
26. Ridenour TA, Treloar JH, Biner PM, Henriksen LW, and Dean RS. Attribute-treatment interaction research using nonexperimental data and the allocation average. Int J Neurosci 1999;99:19-47.
27. Rosnow RL, Rosenthal R. Definition and interpretation of interaction effects. Psychological Bull 1989;105:143-146.
28. Rosnow RL, Rosenthal R. If you are looking at cell means, you're not looking at only the interaction (unless all main effects are zero). Psychological Bull 1991;10:574-576.
29. Rosnow RL, Rosenthal R. "Some things you learn aren't so": Cohen's paradox, Asch's paradigm, and the interpretation of interaction. Psychological Sci 1995;6:3-9.
30. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WMC, Gray JAM, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: What it is and what it isn't. BMJ 1996;312:71-72.
31. Schneider EC, and Eisenberg JM. Strategies and methods for aligning current and best medical practices: The role of information technologies. Western J Med 1998;168:311-318.
32. Shadish WR, Cook TC, Campbell DT. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2002.
33. Shoam V, Rohrbaugh M. Aptitude x treatment interaction (ATI) research: Sharpening the focus, widening the lens. In Aveline M, Shapiro DA, eds. Research Foundation for Psychotherapy Practice. Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons, 1995:73-95.
34. Shoam-Salomon, V. Introduction to special section on client-therapy interaction research. J Consult Clin Psychology 1991;59: 203-204.
35. Shoam-Salomon V, Hannah, M.T. Client-treatment interaction in the study of differential change processes. J Consult Clin Psychology 1991;59:217-225.
36. Smith B, Sechrest, L. Treatment of aptitude x treatment interactions. J Consult Clin Psychology 1991;59:233-244.
37. Snow RE. Aptitude-treatment interaction as a framework for research on individual differences in psychotherapy. J Consult Clin Psychology 1991;59:205-216.
38. Stiles WB, Shapiro DA, Elliott R. Are all psychotherapies equivalent? Am Psychologist 1986;41:165-180.
39. Tonelli MR, Callahan TC. Why alternative medicine cannot be evidence-based. Academic Med 2001;767:1213-1220.