Section A Q1 Flashcards
What did Timmi (2014) assess
Assessed the validity and usefulness of psychiatric diagnosis
What did Timmi (2014) find
Some limitations with standardised psychiatric diagnosis such as the DSM-5
What were the limitations found by Timmi (2014)
- Increased stigmatisation
- Didn’t significantly aid treatment
- Worsening long term prognosis
- Western perspective so not reliable for all cultures
What was the overall outcome for Timmi (2014)
Need to find a less rigid approach that can account for cultural differences and does not label to reduce stigmatisation.
What did Halpin et al (2016) assess
They assessed case formulations for PTSD and psychosis.
What did halpin et al (2016) find
They found significant benefits of using case formulations.
What benefits did Halpin et al (2016) find
- Value of making connections - past and present trauma and identifying triggers.
- Enhancing the patient-therapist relationship by providing a deeper understanding.
Halpin et al (2016) limitations
- Could be distressing - re traumatising
- Case formulation needs to be done with care and empathy with the patient taking the lead.
- The study used unstructured case formulations meaning they could have varied.
- Only female participants so can’t be fully generalisable.
What did rainforth & laurenson (2013) review
They conducted a review of case formulations treatment and framework
What did rainforth & laurenson (2013) provide.
Provided valuable insight into case formulations.
What did Rainforth & Laurenson find
- Case formulations a vital bridge between assessment and treatment phases.
- Individualised case formulation approach better treatment and outcome than psychiatric diagnosis.
- Practitioner training crucial factor enhancing case formulation.
- Challenges in achieving agreement amongst practitioners about how case formulation should be done.
