<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>Therapy Evaluation Research papers: McVey and Unsworth by </title>
      <link>https://padlet.com/jlcahill1/aj87zlni270h</link>
      <description></description>
      <language>en-us</language>
      <pubDate>2017-11-28 11:16:45 UTC</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>2025-11-28 17:27:28 UTC</lastBuildDate>
      <webMaster>hello@padlet.com</webMaster>
      
      <item>
         <title>1. Unsworth - therapists were less positive than clients however, therapists discussed in a group environment not 1:1 as the clients did. </title>
         <author></author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/jlcahill1/aj87zlni270h/wish/428329599</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>2. McVey - External researcher pulling together themes more a Reflexivity approach <br><br>Two extremes. <br><br>Can see why therapists more resistant because not right time to give clients questionnaire and not gathering accurate information. <br><br>Gathering feedback via a researcher more useful as looking at general themes of what works. Less practical to administer. <br><br>Query - What role does Supervision play in evaluation - to allow therapist to improve 'performance and outcomes'? <br><br>Bias in design of forms - a cultural thing - left hand side boxes will be more likely to be ticked. <br><br>Understandable that therapists may resist a box ticking exercise - because reduces their work to a series of pre prescribed sentences - seems at odds with person centred work. <br><br>How does evaluation sit with person centred and will this make it directive? <br><br>IAPT and CBT demands evidence of efficacy which is delivered from data to enable funders to invest. <br><br>Evolving methodologies may reduce reliance on paper based forms as brain activity can be monitored and results implied from this. <br><br><br></div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2020-01-07 12:03:18 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/jlcahill1/aj87zlni270h/wish/428329599</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>Reflections in the moment and afterwards to get a full evaluative perspective.</title>
         <author></author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/jlcahill1/aj87zlni270h/wish/428329928</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>but this evaluates the process, not the outcome and always subjective. Doesn’t take client into account. Could get second perspective from supervision.<br><br>If suitable for type of therapeutic approach a more quantative approach such as core net would be useful. But would like to apply something more systematic like this for psychodynamic.<br><br>What is the purpose of evaluation? Continuous improvement? Monitoring or measuring effectiveness?<br><br>3.  Finance limitation<br>Therapists not always skilled in reflexivity. </div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2020-01-07 12:05:08 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/jlcahill1/aj87zlni270h/wish/428329928</guid>
      </item>
   </channel>
</rss>
