Skip to main content
Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1026/1616-3443/a000518

Zusammenfassung.Theoretischer Hintergrund: Der Diskurs um eine evidenz-basierte und personalisierte (bzw. „Precision“) Medizin sowie zur Umsetzung von Evaluation und Qualitätssicherung hat in den letzten Jahren auch Einfluss auf die Psychotherapieforschung genommen. Dies gilt in Bezug auf die patientenspezifische Auswahl von Behandlungen (u. a. personalisierte Vorhersagen) als auch für die dynamische Anpassung von Interventionen im Therapieverlauf (adaptive Indikation, Feedback, Problemlösetools). Fragestellung und Methode: Im Bereich der differentiellen Indikation sind mittlerweile unterschiedliche Algorithmen („machine learning“) und Netzwerkmodelle zur Vorhersage erprobt worden. Für eine empirisch gestützte adaptive Indikation bilden insbesondere die Studien zum psychometrischen Feedback sowie die Entwicklung von Problemlösetools für Risikopatient_innen die Grundlage. Ergebnisse: Diese Grundlagenforschung war die Basis für die Entwicklung eines Entscheidungssystems (Trierer Therapie Navigator, TTN) zur Vorhersage der optimalen Behandlungsstrategie und des Abbruchrisikos. Darüber hinaus enthält der TTN ein adaptives Modellierungselement des Behandlungsverlaufs. Es können damit Risikopatienten für einen Behandlungsmisserfolg identifiziert und Behandlungsoptimierungen über Problemlösetools unterstützt werden. Schlussfolgerungen: In vorliegender Arbeit werden zentrale neue Ansätze einer evidenz-basierten und personalisierten Psychotherapie zusammenfassend dargestellt sowie die Anwendung in der klinischen Praxis diskutiert.


Perspectives of an Evidence-Based and Personalized Psychotherapy: The Trier Treatment Navigator (TTN)

Abstract.Background and objective: The discourse on evidence-based and personalized (or precision) medicine and the implementation of evaluation and quality monitoring in recent years has also had an impact on psychotherapy research. This relates to both patient-specific treatment selection (i. e., personalized predictions) and dynamic adaptation of interventions during the course of therapy (feedback, clinical support tools). Method: In the field of personalized predictions, several algorithms (i. e., machine learning) and network models have been applied to predict the optimal treatment protocol, the risk of drop-out, or the effects of specific treatment strategies. The basis for a personalized and empirically supported adaptive feedback and support system is mainly provided by studies of psychometric feedback and the development of clinical support tools for patients at risk of deterioration. Results and conclusion: This article describes central contemporary approaches in this field of research and discusses implementation in clinical practice by means of the Trier Treatment Navigator (TTN).

Literatur

  • Beutler, L. E., Clarkin, J. & Bongar, B. (2000). Guidebooks in Clinical Psychology. Guidelines for the Systematic Treatment of the Depressed Patient. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bickman, L., Kelley, S. D., Breda, C., Andrade, A. R. de & Riemer, M. (2011). Effects of routine feedback to clinicians on mental health outcomes of youths. Results of a randomized trial. Psychiatric Services (Washington, D.C.), 62, 1423 – 1429. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Byrne, S. L., Hooke, G. R., Newnham, E. A. & Page, A. C. (2012). The effects of progress monitoring on subsequent readmission to psychiatric care. A six-month follow-up. Journal of Affective Disorders, 137 (1 – 3), 113 – 116. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Caspar, F. (1997). What Goes on in a Psychotherapist’s Mind? Psychotherapy Research, 7 (2), 105 – 125. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Castonguay, L. G., Barkham, M., Lutz, W. & McAleavey, A. (2013). Practice-Oriented Research: Approaches and Applications. In M. J. Lambert (Ed.), Bergin and Garfield‘s handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (6th ed., pp. 85 – 133). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Chekroud, A. M., Zotti, R. J., Shehzad, Z., Gueorguieva, R., Johnson, M. K., Trivedi, M. H. et al. (2016). Cross-trial prediction of treatment outcome in depression. A machine learning approach. The Lancet Psychiatry, 3, 243 – 250. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Clark, D. M., Layard, R., Smithies, R., Richards, D. A., Suckling, R. & Wright, B. (2009). Improving access to psychological therapy. Initial evaluation of two UK demonstration sites. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 47, 910 – 920. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cohen, Z. D. & DeRubeis, R. J. (2018). Treatment Selection in Depression. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 14, 209 – 236. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Colvonen, P. J., Glassman, L. H., Crocker, L. D., Buttner, M. M., Orff, H., Schiehser, D. M. et al. (2017). Pretreatment biomarkers predicting PTSD psychotherapy outcomes. A systematic review. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 75, 140 – 156. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cuijpers, P., Karyotaki, E., Reijnders, M. & Huibers, M. J. H. (2018). Who benefits from psychotherapies for adult depression? A meta-analytic update of the evidence. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 47 (2), 91 – 106. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cuijpers, P., Reijnders, M., Karyotaki, E., Wit, L. de & Ebert, D. D. (2018). Negative effects of psychotherapies for adult depression. A meta-analysis of deterioration rates. Journal of Affective Disorders, 239, 138 – 145. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Davidson, K., Perry, A. & Bell, L. (2015). Would continuous feedback of patient‘s clinical outcomes to practitioners improve NHS psychological therapy services? Critical analysis and assessment of quality of existing studies. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory Research and Practice, 88 (1), 21 – 37. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Deisenhofer, A.-K., Delgadillo, J., Rubel, J. A., Böhnke, J. R., Zimmermann, D., Schwartz, B. et al. (2018). Individual treatment selection for patients with posttraumatic stress disorder. Depression and Anxiety, 35, 541 – 550. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Delgadillo, J., Huey, D., Bennett, H. & McMillan, D. (2017). Case complexity as a guide for psychological treatment selection. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 85, 835 – 853. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Delgadillo, J., Jong, K. de, Lucock, M., Lutz, W., Rubel, J., Gilbody, S. et al. (2018). Feedback-informed treatment versus usual psychological treatment for depression and anxiety. A multisite, open-label, cluster randomised controlled trial. The Lancet Psychiatry, 5, 564 – 572. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Delgadillo, J., Moreea, O. & Lutz, W. (2016). Different people respond differently to therapy. A demonstration using patient profiling and risk stratification. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 79, 15 – 22. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Delgadillo, J., Overend, K., Lucock, M., Groom, M., Kirby, N., McMillan, D. et al. (2017). Improving the efficiency of psychological treatment using outcome feedback technology. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 99, 89 – 97. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • DeRubeis, R. J., Cohen, Z. D., Forand, N. R., Fournier, J. C., Gelfand, L. A. & Lorenzo-Luaces, L. (2014). The Personalized Advantage Index. Translating research on prediction into individualized treatment recommendations. A demonstration. PloS one, 9 (1)., e83875. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Epskamp, S., Borkulo, C. D. van, Veen, D. C. van der, Servaas, M. N., Isvoranu, A.-M., Riese, H. et al. (2018). Personalized Network Modeling in Psychopathology. The Importance of Contemporaneous and Temporal Connections. Clinical Psychological Science, 6, 416 – 427. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Fisher, A. J., Reeves, J. W., Lawyer, G., Medaglia, J. D. & Rubel, J. A. (2017). Exploring the idiographic dynamics of mood and anxiety via network analysis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 126, 1044 – 1056. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Fonseka, T. M., MacQueen, G. M. & Kennedy, S. H. (2018). Neuroimaging biomarkers as predictors of treatment outcome in Major Depressive Disorder. Journal of Affective Disorders, 233, 21 – 35. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Furukawa, T. A., Efthimiou, O., Weitz, E. S., Cipriani, A., Keller, M. B., Kocsis, J. H. et al. (2018). Cognitive-Behavioral Analysis System of Psychotherapy, Drug, or Their Combination for Persistent Depressive Disorder. Personalizing the Treatment Choice Using Individual Participant Data Network Metaregression. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 87 (3), 1 – 14. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Gleacher, A. A., Olin, S. S., Nadeem, E., Pollock, M., Ringle, V., Bickman, L. et al. (2016). Implementing a Measurement Feedback System in Community Mental Health Clinics. A Case Study of Multilevel Barriers and Facilitators. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 43, 426 – 440. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Gondek, D., Edbrooke-Childs, J., Fink, E., Deighton, J. & Wolpert, M. (2016). Feedback from Outcome Measures and Treatment Effectiveness, Treatment Efficiency, and Collaborative Practice. A Systematic Review. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 43, 325 – 343. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Grikscheit, F., Weck, F., Hautzinger, M., Heidenreich, T., Weigel, M., Rudari, V. et al. (2015). Evaluation of Treatment Integrity. The Treatment Specificity Index. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 71, 653 – 665. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hannan, C., Lambert, M. J., Harmon, C., Nielsen, S. L., Smart, D. W., Shimokawa, K. et al. (2005). A lab test and algorithms for identifying clients at risk for treatment failure. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 61, 155 – 163. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hofmann, S. G. & Hayes, S. C. (2018). The Future of Intervention Science. Process-Based Therapy. Clinical Psychological Science, 7 (1), 37 – 50. https://doi.org/10.1177/21677026i8772296 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Howard, K. I., Moras, K., Brill, P. L., Martinovich, Z. & Lutz, W. (1996). Evaluation of psychotherapy. Efficacy, effectiveness, and patient progress. The American Psychologist, 51, 1059 – 1064. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hoyer, J., Velten, J., Benecke, C., Berking, M., Heinrichs, N., In-Albon, T. et al. (2015). Koordination der Forschung an Hochschulambulanzen für Psychotherapie: Status quo und Agenda. Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie, 44, 80 – 87. First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • Huibers, M. J. H., Cohen, Z. D., Lemmens, L. H. J. M., Arntz, A., Peeters, F. P. M. L., Cuijpers, P. et al. (2015). Predicting Optimal Outcomes in Cognitive Therapy or Interpersonal Psychotherapy for Depressed Individuals Using the Personalized Advantage Index Approach. PloS one, 10 (11)., e0140771. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Janse, P. D., Jong, K. de, Van Dijk, M. K., Hutschemaekers, G. J. & Verbraak, M. J. (2017). Improving the efficiency of cognitive-behavioural therapy by using formal client feedback. Psychotherapy Research, 27, 525 – 538. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2016.1152408 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Jensen-Doss, A., Haimes, E. M. B., Smith, A. M., Lyon, A. R., Lewis, C. C., Stanick, C. F. et al. (2018). Monitoring treatment progress and providing feedback is viewed favorably but rarely used in practice. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 45 (1), 48 – 61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-016-0763-0 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kendrick, T., El-Gohary, M., Stuart, B., Gilbody, S., Churchill, R., Aiken, L. et al. (2016). Routine use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) for improving treatment of common mental health disorders in adults. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 7, CD011119. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Kessler, R. C., Loo, H. M. van, Wardenaar, K. J., Bossarte, R. M., Brenner, L. A., Ebert, D. D. et al. (2017). Using patient self-reports to study heterogeneity of treatment effects in major depressive disorder. Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences, 26 (1), 22 – 36. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Krägeloh, C. U., Czuba, K. J., Billington, D. R., Kersten, P. & Siegert, R. J. (2015). Using feedback from patient-reported outcome measures in mental health services. A scoping study and typology. Psychiatric Services (Washington, D.C.), 66, 224 – 241. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lambert, M. (2007). Presidential address: What we have learned from a decade of research aimed at improving psychotherapy outcome in routine care. Psychotherapy Research, 17 (1), 1 – 14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503300601032506 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lambert, M. J., Bailey, R. J., Kimball, K., Shimokawa, K., Harmon, S. C. & Slade, K. (2007). Clinical support tools manual – Brief version-40. Salt Lake City, UT: OQMeasures LLC. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Lambert, M. J. & Shimokawa, K. (2011). Collecting client feedback. Psychotherapy (Chicago, Ill.), 48, 72 – 79. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lambert, M. J., Whipple, J. L. & Kleinstäuber, M. (2018). Collecting and delivering progress feedback. A meta-analysis of routine outcome monitoring. Psychotherapy (Chicago, Ill.), 55, 520 – 537. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lindhiem, O., Kolko, D. J. & Cheng, Y. (2012). Predicting psychotherapy benefit. A probabilistic and individualized approach. Behavior Therapy, 43, 381 – 392. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lorenzo-Luaces, L., DeRubeis, R. J., Straten, A. van & Tiemens, B. (2017). A prognostic index (PI) as a moderator of outcomes in the treatment of depression. A proof of concept combining multiple variables to inform risk-stratified stepped care models. Journal of Affective Disorders, 213, 78 – 85. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Luedtke, A., Sadikova, E. & Kessler, R. C. (2019). Sample Size Requirements for Multivariate Models to Predict Between-Patient Differences in Best Treatments of Major Depressive Disorder. Clinical Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702618815466 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lutz, W., Arndt, A., Rubel, J., Berger, T., Schröder, J., Späth, C. et al. (2017). Defining and Predicting Patterns of Early Response in a Web-Based Intervention for Depression. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 19 (6)., e206. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lutz, W., Clausen, S. A., Bennemann, B., Zimmermann, D., Prinz, J., Rubel, J. et al. (im Druck). Chancen von E-Mental-Health und eProzessdiagnostik in der ambulanten Psychotherapie: Der Trierer Therapie Navigator (TTN). Verhaltenstherapie. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Lutz, W., Ehrlich, T., Rubel, J., Hallwachs, N., Röttger, M.-A., Jorasz, C. et al. (2013). The ups and downs of psychotherapy. Sudden gains and sudden losses identified with session reports. Psychotherapy Research, 23, 14 – 24. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lutz, W., Jong, K. de & Rubel, J. (2015). Patient-focused and feedback research in psychotherapy. Where are we and where do we want to go? Psychotherapy Research, 25, 625 – 632. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lutz, W., Lambert, M. J., Harmon, S. C., Tschitsaz, A., Schürch, E. & Stulz, N. (2006). The probability of treatment success, failure and duration – what can be learned from empirical data to support decision making in clinical practice? Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy: An International Journal of Theory & Practice, 13, 223 – 232. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lutz, W., Leach, C., Barkham, M., Lucock, M., Stiles, W. B., Evans, C. et al. (2005). Predicting change for individual psychotherapy clients on the basis of their nearest neighbors. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73, 904 – 913. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lutz, W., Neu, R. & Rubel, J. A. (2019). Evaluation und Effekterfassung in der Psychotherapie. Göttingen: Hogrefe. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lutz, W., Rubel, J., Schiefele, A.-K., Zimmermann, D., Böhnke, J. R. & Wittmann, W. W. (2015). Feedback and therapist effects in the context of treatment outcome and treatment length. Psychotherapy Research, 25, 647 – 660. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lutz, W., Rubel, J. A., Schwartz, B., Schilling, V. & Deisenhofer, A.–K. (im Druck). Towards integrating personalized feedback research into clinical practice. Development of the Trier Treatment Navigator (TTN). Behaviour Research and Therapy. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Lutz, W., Saunders, S. M., Leon, S. C., Martinovich, Z., Kosfelder, J., Schulte, D. et al. (2006). Empirically and clinically useful decision making in psychotherapy. Differential predictions with treatment response models. Psychological Assessment, 18 (2), 133 – 141. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lutz, W., Schwartz, B., Hofmann, S. G., Fisher, A. J., Husen, K. & Rubel, J. A. (2018). Using network analysis for the prediction of treatment dropout in patients with mood and anxiety disorders. A methodological proof-of-concept study. Scientific Reports, 8, 7819. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Lutz, W., Zimmermann, D., Müller, V. N. L. S., Deisenhofer, A.-K. & Rubel, J. A. (2017). Randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effects of personalized prediction and adaptation tools on treatment outcome in outpatient psychotherapy. Study protocol. BMC Psychiatry, 17, 306. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Lyon, A. R., Dorsey, S., Pullmann, M., Silbaugh-Cowdin, J. & Berliner, L. (2015). Clinician use of standardized assessments following a common elements psychotherapy training and consultation program. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42 (1), 47 – 60. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Margraf., J. & Schneider, S. (Hrsg.). (2018). Lehrbuch der Verhaltenstherapie. Band 1: Grundlagen, Diagnostik, Verfahren und Rahmenbedingungen psychologischer Therapie (4., vollst. überarb. und aktual. Aufl.). Berlin: Springer. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • McGrath, C. L., Kelley, M. E., Holtzheimer, P. E., Dunlop, B. W., Craighead, W. E., Franco, A. R. et al. (2013). Toward a neuroimaging treatment selection biomarker for major depressive disorder. JAMA Psychiatry, 70, 821 – 829. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Paul, G. L. (1967). Strategy of outcome research in psychotherapy. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 31, 109 – 118. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Pearl, J. (2018). The Seven Tools of Causal Inference with Reflections on Machine Learning. Technical Report, Communications of Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), New York, NY. Retrieved from https://ftp.cs.ucla.edu/pub/stat_ser/r481.pdf First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Rief, W., Bleichhardt, G., Dannehl, K., Euteneuer, F. & Wambach, K. (2018). Comparing the Efficacy of CBASP with Two Versions of CBT for Depression in a Routine Care Center. A Randomized Clinical Trial. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 87, 164 – 178. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rubel, J. A., Fisher, A. J., Husen, K. & Lutz, W. (2018). Translating Person-Specific Network Models into Personalized Treatments. Development and Demonstration of the Dynamic Assessment Treatment Algorithm for Individual Networks (DATA-IN). Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 87, 249 – 251. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rubel, J. A., Zimmermann, D., Deisenhofer, A.-K., Müller, V. & Lutz, W. (2017). Nutzung von psychometrischem Feedback als empirische Unterstützung des Supervisionsprozesses bei Ausbildungstherapien. Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie, 46, 83 – 95. First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • Rubel, J. A., Zimmermann, D., Müller, V. & Lutz, W. (2017). Qualitätssicherung in der Psychotherapie. Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik, Medizinische Psychologie, 67, 436 – 448. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Shimokawa, K., Lambert, M. J. & Smart, D. W. (2010). Enhancing treatment outcome of patients at risk of treatment failure. Meta-analytic and mega-analytic review of a psychotherapy quality assurance system. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 78 (3), 298 – 311. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Spielmans, G. I. & Flückiger, C. (2018). Moderators in psychotherapy meta-analysis. Psychotherapy Research, 28, 333 – 346. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Schulte, D. & Eifert, G. H. (2002). What to do when manuals fail? The dual model of psychotherapy. Clinical Psychology – Science and Practice, 9, 312 – 328. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Tuschen-Caffier, B. & Hoyer, J. (2014). Die sogenannte Dritte Welle? Evidenzbasiert, nützlich oder überflüssig? Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie, 43, 279 – 284. First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • Velten, J., Bräscher, A.-K., Fehm, L., Fladung, A.-K., Fydrich, T., Heider, J. et al. (2018). Behandlungsdiagnosen in universitären Ambulanzen für psychologische Psychotherapie im Jahr 2016. Ergebnisse einer Machbarkeitsstudie zum KODAP-Projekt. Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie, 47, 175 – 185. https://doi.org/10.1026/1616-3443/a000490 First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • Velten, J., Margraf, J., Benecke, C., Berking, M., In-Albon, T., Lincoln, T. et al. (2017). Methodenpapier zur Koordination der Datenerhebung und -auswertung an Hochschul- und Ausbildungsambulanzen für Psychotherapie (KODAP). Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie, 46, 169 – 175. First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • Walfish, S., McAlister, B., O‘Donnell, P. & Lambert, M. J. (2012). An investigation of self-assessment bias in mental health providers. Psychological Reports, 110, 639 – 644. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Webb, C. A., Trivedi, M. H., Cohen, Z. D., Dillon, D. G., Fournier, J. C., Goer, F. et al. (2018). Personalized prediction of antidepressant v. placebo response. Evidence from the EMBARC study. Psychological Medicine, 49, 1118 – 1127. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291718001708 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Weck, F. (2017). Wie lässt sich die psychotherapeutische Ausbildung optimieren? Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie, 46, 71 – 72. First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • Wright, A. G. C. & Zimmermann, J. (2019). Applied Ambulatory Assessment. Integrating Idiographic and Nomothetic Principles of Measurement. Psychological Assessment. Advance online publication https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000685 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Wucherpfennig, F., Rubel, J. A., Hollon, S. D. & Lutz, W. (2017). Sudden gains in routine care cognitive behavioral therapy for depression. A replication with extensions. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 89, 24 – 32. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar