The meta-analysis of clinical judgment project:: Fifty-six years of accumulated research on clinical versus statistical prediction
The meta-analysis of clinical judgment project:: Fifty-six years of accumulated research on clinical versus statistical prediction
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/0011000005285875
复制
发表时间：
2006-05-01
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Rush, JD
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
AEgisdottir, S;White, MJ;Rush, JD
将心理健康从业者做出的临床预测与使用统计方法的预测进行比较。通过对 56 年研究的综合检索，确定了 67 项研究；这些研究得出了 92 个效应量。临床预测与统计预测的总体效果表明统计方法的准确性更高。最严格的研究样本（提取了 48 个效应量）表明，使用统计方法与临床方法相比，准确性提高了 13%。有几个变量影响了这一总体效果。临床和统计预测的准确性因预测类型、收集预测数据的环境、使用的统计公式的类型以及临床医生和公式可用的信息量而异。提供了关于咨询心理学家何时、在何种条件下可以使用统计公式以及何时可以依赖临床方法的建议。讨论了对临床判断研究和培训的影响。
Clinical predictions made by mental health practitioners are compared with those using statistical approaches. Sixty-seven studies were identified from a comprehensive search of 56 years of research; 92 effect sizes were derived front these studies. The overall effect of clinical versus statistical prediction showed a somewhat greater accuracy for statistical methods. The most stringent sample of studies, front which 48 effect sizes were extracted, indicated a 13% increase in accuracy using statistical versus clinical methods. Several variables influenced this overall effect. Clinical and statistical prediction accuracy varied by type of prediction, the setting in which predictor data were gathered, the type of statistical formula used, and the amount of information available to the clinicians and the formulas. Recommedations are provided about when and tinder what conditions counseling psychologists might use statistical formulas to well as when they can rely on clinical methods. Implications for clinical judgement research and training are discussed.