ABSTRACT

In the present paper we examine four cases in which the assumption that “good outcome” necessarily means “good therapy” did not hold. Cases were selected that reported good pre-post outcome (i.e., clinically reliable decrease in symptom severity) but a negative (disappointing) therapy experience, drawn from a randomized controlled trial (the Ghent Psychotherapy Study) and a naturalistic outcome study (the Stockholm Young Adults Psychotherapy Project). Analysis of these seemingly contrasting findings made it possible to identify three distinct patterns of client experience of outcome. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

中文翻译：

---

当“良好的结果”不对应于“良好的治疗”时：对结果评分与患者治疗满意度之间差异的思考

摘要

在本文中，我们研究了四个案例，其中“良好结果”必然意味着“良好治疗”的假设不成立。从随机对照试验（根特心理治疗研究）和自然主义结果研究（斯德哥尔摩青年医学会成人心理治疗项目）。对这些看似截然不同的发现的分析使得确定三种不同的客户体验结果模式成为可能。讨论了对研究和实践的影响。