That's my point too

Hi Shawn,

This is what I keep trying to say: That it's only one study. Although there are another couple of controlled comparisons that suggest that the therapeutic effect for EMDR may occur more quickly than for PE:

McFarlane, A. (2000, November). Comparison of EMDR and CBT for PTSD. In B. van der Kolk (chair), Current research on EMDR. Symposium presented at the annual meeting of the International Society of Traumatic Stress Studies, San Antonio.

Also the Power et al one I cited recently.

Even so, I am not trying to say that this proves anything. My main point, the way I got into this latest thing, is exactly this: that the findings of one study are not enough to take to the bank. If you'll recall, this was a response to Landry who said, more or less, that now that we have the Taylor et al study, we can throw EMDR away. Especially when there are so many fairly good studies that show EMDR and CBT to be more similar than different in clinical outcomes; and some studies that favor EMDR in one way or another.

Again, I am not saying that this shows that EMDR is better. Just that it's too soon to tell, and definitely too soon to throw EMDR away.

I'm sorry, I am unable to respond to your other question about Ironson et al. I had been quoting my own grant application when characterizing it the way I did on that post, but I am on the road and don't have direct access to the Ironson et al paper right now.

I'm surprised that you would cite Devilly and Spence as an example of CBT having a better retention rate than EMDR. This was not an RCT - did not even merit inclusion in the ISTSS review - they had poor treatment fidelity for EMDR (not according to their own rater, whose qualifications were dubious, but based on their published description of what they did), they were an outlier in terms of their EMDR outcomes, and most of their EMDR treatment dropouts occurred prior to the onset of EMDR treatment (presumably meaning that they scared participants away somehow). I just don't think the findings of this study can be meaningfully interpreted in a way that sheds any light on EMDR. You being such a methodological stickler, well, I respect you, and this citation surprised me.

Replies:

Re:Here's the point, by Landry, 04/23/03 Re:Here's the point, by Sandra Paulsen Inobe PhD, 04/24/03 Re:Here's the point, by Realist, 04/24/03 Different methodological positions, by Cahill, 04/24/03 Re:Different methodological positions, by Realist, 04/24/03 Re:Different methodological positions, by Sandra Paulsen Inobe PhD, 04/25/03 Re:Here's the point, by Carol Ann Rowland, MSW, RSW, 04/24/03 Re:Here's the point, by Ricky Greenwald, 04/25/03 researcher allegiance, by Ricky Greenwald, 04/25/03 Re:Here's the point, by Landry, 04/26/03 Re:Here's the point, by Ricky Greenwald, 04/28/03 Something unique happening in EMDR?, by Cahill, 05/01/03 Re:Something unique , by Fred H., 05/09/03 Let's leave innuendo out of the discussion, by Cahill, 04/26/03 Re:Let's leave innuendo out of the discussion, by Ricky Greenwald, 04/28/03 Devilly & Spence, logical analyses and other stuff, by Cahill, 05/01/03 Re:Devilly & Spence, logical analyses and other stuff, by Realist, 05/02/03

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.