The information we’ve compiled within the articles in our Knowledge Vault are sourced from a wide variety of references, most of which are linked and available online. We’ve taken care to utilize primary academic sources where available, gauge the trustworthiness of non-primary sources, and ensure that the information we’ve reported accurately reflects the source material.

However, we must emphasize several points:

First, research findings should be interpreted with some caution, and this is especially true for readers who are not intimately familiar with the subject nor source material. At a broad level, our current understanding of treatment model effectiveness is subject to change as new information arises from scientific research. Some psychotherapeutic treatment models have not been researched as extensively as others, and therefore claims to their efficacy may not be as well-substantiated. At a more specific level, conclusions drawn through scientific research are often derived from technical mathematical analysis of the data; we then summarize and report these conclusions in ways that are easier for readers to digest, but which often do not include the same level of precision described in the original source. For example, a statement such as “this study suggests cognitive behavioral therapy is effective in the treatment of depression” excludes information about the degree of effectiveness, additional treatment population demographics, treatment setting, effectiveness duration, the elements of CBT that were specifically effective, the ways that depression outcome variables were defined within the study, and the ways in which treatment outcome variables were measured (to name a few). Additionally, studies vary in terms of scope, quality, and rigor; consequently, the conclusions they draw may not carry equal weight. We make efforts to link the source material so that one can further examine this information if they choose.

Second, the information reported here is neither comprehensive nor exhaustive. Studies for virtually all well-established psychotherapeutic treatment modalities exist which may indicate that these treatments are not effective for certain disorders, populations, or under certain conditions, or whose results may conflict with those reported in other studies. Furthermore, mental health professionals often have personal opinions about the strengths and shortcomings of various treatment modalities, and it’s not uncommon to hear criticisms of even the most well-researched treatment approaches.

Our primary intent is to provide to you, the reader, with a reasoned basis for our treatment philosophy and other topics we believe are important or interesting. As we describe here, it is important to integrate knowledge of various treatment theories with beliefs, values, and worldviews in order to form an effective treatment philosophy. We aim to communicate reasons why we believe our treatment philosophy is effective, and to provide reference information that may be useful to our clients throughout the course of treatment.