Universität Wien

200159 SE Vertiefungsseminar: Klinische Psychologie und Gesundheitspsychologie (2022W)

Evaluation psychologischer Interventionen: Randomisierte Studien

4.00 ECTS (2.00 SWS), SPL 20 - Psychologie
Prüfungsimmanente Lehrveranstaltung
GEMISCHT

Vertiefungsseminare können nur fürs Pflichtmodul B verwendet werden! Eine Verwendung fürs Modul A4 Freie Fächer ist nicht möglich.
Moodle

An/Abmeldung

Hinweis: Ihr Anmeldezeitpunkt innerhalb der Frist hat keine Auswirkungen auf die Platzvergabe (kein "first come, first served").

Details

max. 20 Teilnehmer*innen
Sprache: Deutsch

Lehrende

Termine (iCal) - nächster Termin ist mit N markiert

  • Donnerstag 06.10. 15:00 - 16:30 Hörsaal H Psychologie KG Liebiggasse 5
  • Donnerstag 13.10. 15:00 - 16:30 Hörsaal H Psychologie KG Liebiggasse 5
  • Donnerstag 20.10. 15:00 - 16:30 Hörsaal H Psychologie KG Liebiggasse 5
  • Donnerstag 03.11. 15:00 - 16:30 Digital
  • Donnerstag 17.11. 15:00 - 16:30 Hörsaal H Psychologie KG Liebiggasse 5
  • Donnerstag 24.11. 15:00 - 16:30 Hörsaal H Psychologie KG Liebiggasse 5
  • Donnerstag 01.12. 15:00 - 16:30 Hörsaal H Psychologie KG Liebiggasse 5
  • Donnerstag 15.12. 18:00 - 19:00 Digital
  • Donnerstag 12.01. 15:00 - 18:15 Hörsaal D Psychologie, NIG 6.Stock A0624
  • Donnerstag 19.01. 15:00 - 18:15 Hörsaal D Psychologie, NIG 6.Stock A0624
  • Donnerstag 26.01. 15:00 - 16:30 Hörsaal H Psychologie KG Liebiggasse 5

Information

Ziele, Inhalte und Methode der Lehrveranstaltung

This seminar can be held in German or English, depending on students‘ preferences. All literature is in English. Presentations by students can be in German or English.

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are generally regarded as the gold standard in the evaluation of health-related interventions. If conducted appropriately, they can provide more reliable evidence of intervention effects than any other research design. However, conducting high-quality RCTs of psychological interventions is particularly difficult for several reasons. These include the difficulty of conducting interventions in a consistent way across intervention providers and participants (treatment fidelity); the difficulty of blinding participants, intervention providers, and outcome assessors; and the difficulty of finding an appropriate control or comparison intervention. In contrast to pharmacological development, where the need for regulatory approval imposes additional pressure towards rigorous trial design, conduct, and reporting, the lack of a corresponding process in psychological interventions may contribute further to an imbalance in methodological rigour.
This seminar provides you with an overview of methodological considerations when designing, conducting, analysing and reporting RCTs of psychological interventions. You will find and use (at least) one RCT in an area of your interest and apply these methodological considerations to that trial. At the end of this seminar, you will be able to critically appraise the methodological quality of RCTs of psychological interventions, and you will also have the basic knowledge needed for designing such RCTs yourself.

1. Introduction: Hierarchy of evidence – from single case studies to RCTs; PICO questions; selecting an RCT to use in this seminar
2. Designing trials that are fit for purpose: Pragmatic (effectiveness) versus explanatory (efficacy) trials [reading material: Thorpe 2009; Loudon 2015; precis-2.org]
3. Randomisation, allocation concealment, and blinding [Moher 2010, items 8-11, Box 2-4; consort-statement.org]
4. Whom is this trial about? The intention-to-treat principle, per-protocol analysis, and dealing with missing data [Moher 2010, Fig 3, Box 6]
5. Replicability of interventions: manuals, treatment fidelity, therapist effects [Boutron 2017; Hoffmann 2014]; What is an appropriate control group? [Gold 2015]
6. Eligibility criteria: Wide or narrow? [Thorpe 2009; Loudon 2015; precis-2.org]
7. Appropriate and replicable statistical analysis [Gold 2015]
8. Developing RCTs and systematic reviews over time to develop an intervention: Example from practice
9. Presentations by students I
10. Presentations by students II
11. Meta-analysis, risk of bias assessment, grading the evidence; any remaining topics and questions especially https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/current/chapter-08

Art der Leistungskontrolle und erlaubte Hilfsmittel

Oral presentations, written assignments, participation.
Regular attendance at the seminar sessions (min. 80%) is a prerequisite for successful completion of the seminar.

Mindestanforderungen und Beurteilungsmaßstab

Comfortable with reading scientific literature in English; some knowledge of statistics.

Prüfungsstoff

Literatur

• Boutron, I., Altman, D. G., Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., Ravaud, P., & Grp, C. N. (2017). CONSORT Statement for Randomized Trials of Nonpharmacologic Treatments: A 2017 Update and a CONSORT Extension for Nonpharmacologic Trial Abstracts. Ann Intern Med, 167(1), 40-+. https://doi.org/10.7326/M17-0046
• Gold, C. (2015). Quantitative psychotherapy outcome research: Methodological issues. In O. C. G. Gelo, A. Pritz, & B. Rieken (Eds.), Psychotherapy Research: Foundations, Process, and Outcome (pp. 537–558). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-1382-0_26
• Hoffmann, T. C., Glasziou, P. P., Boutron, I., Milne, R., Perera, R., Moher, D., Altman, D. G., Barbour, V., Macdonald, H., Johnston, M., Lamb, S. E., Dixon-Woods, M., McCulloch, P., Wyatt, J. C., Chan, A. W., & Michie, S. (2014). Better reporting of interventions: Template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ, 348, g1687. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g1687
• Loudon, K., Treweek, S., Sullivan, F., Donnan, P., Thorpe, K. E., & Zwarenstein, M. (2015). The PRECIS-2 tool: Designing trials that are fit for purpose. BMJ, 350. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h2147
• Moher, D., Hopewell, S., Schulz, K. F., Montori, V., Gøtzsche, P. C., Devereaux, P. J., Elbourne, D., Egger, M., & Altman, D. G. (2010). CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ, 340, c869. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c869
• Thorpe, K. E., Zwarenstein, M., Oxman, A. D., Treweek, S., Furberg, C. D., Altman, D. G., Tunis, S., Bergel, E., Harvey, I., Magid, D. J., & Chalkidou, K. (2009). A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): A tool to help trial designers. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62, 464–475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.12.011

Zuordnung im Vorlesungsverzeichnis

Letzte Änderung: Do 11.05.2023 11:27