Evidence-based practice promotes those research-supported treatments that have proven effective, but it rarely identifies discredited treatments that are to be avoided. We sought to establish a professional consensus on discredited addiction treatments using Delphi methodology. A panel of 75 experts participated in a 2-stage study, reporting familiarity with 65 treatments and rating these on a continuum from “not at all discredited” to “certainly discredited.” We report their composite opinions and significant differences that occurred as a function of the panelists’ theoretical orientation. The results require careful interpretation, but do offer a cogent first step in identifying a professional consensus of discredited treatments for addictions.
From the Department of Psychology, University of Scranton (JCN, NCF), Scranton, PA; Dean’s Office, Simmons College (GPK), Boston, MA; and National Development and Research Institutes (HKW), New York, NY.
Received for publication April 17, 2009; accepted October 13, 2009.
Send correspondence and reprint requests to John C. Norcross, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Scranton, Scranton, PA 18510-4596. e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org