24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 1242  |  回复: 5
当前只显示满足指定条件的回帖,点击这里查看本话题的所有回帖

singer32

银虫 (正式写手)

[交流] 【Original】Psychology vs. Psychiatry: What's the Difference, and Which Is Bette



     Psychologists and psychiatrists tend to hate each other. The reasons are historical: beginning even before Freud, psychologists held enormous power over the cultural imagination. The whole idea of psychiatry — an explicitly chemical rather than behavioral treatment of the mind — didn't start until the industrial age, and for a long time afterward, psychiatrists were held in disregard.

   Friday morning, psychiatrists take a bit of revenge. Even after years of symposia and papers designed to reconnect the two tendril branches of mental-health treatment, the American Psychiatric Association has released new guidelines for treatment of depression that still denigrate the cognitive and behavioral approaches of the American Psychological Association
        
    According to the new guidelines — which will govern treatment for the 200,000 in-patient psychiatric patients in the U.S., as well as the 20 million or so who get out-patient treatment — the No.-1 preferred approach is drugs. Just drugs. The guidelines don't mention psychological approaches like cognitive-behavioral therapy until No. 3, just after electroshock therapy. Ouch.

The new guidelines underplay an enormous body of data from the past decade showing that even the best psychiatric drugs work better than sugar pills only when the drugs are used in conjunction with psychological therapies that help patients change how they behave and how they form their thoughts. Neither a strictly psychiatric approach (just drugs) nor a strictly psychological approach (just talk therapy) works much better than a placebo pill on its own. But when used in combination, the psychiatric and psychological treatments help a majority of people get better.

So why can't A.P.A. and A.P.A. get along?

   One reason is a problem of data. The new American *Psychiatric* guidelines released today conflate several psychotherapy approaches equally because at least one or two randomized trials has shown them to be effective. But cognitive-behavioral therapy has a huge base of evidence compared to rather obscure approaches such as interpersonal therapy. In the context of national guidelines that will shape the treatment of millions, it borders on quackery to include cognitive-behavioral therapy in the same sentence that the A.P.A. (American *Psychiatric*, ugh) calls “problem-solving therapy.”
回复此楼
http://weibo.com/xiange32
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

singer32

银虫 (正式写手)

引用回帖:
Originally posted by 三更雨~ at 2010-10-02 22:23:45:
That is really a little

if u ,which one do U prefer to ?
http://weibo.com/xiange32
5楼2010-10-03 00:04:54
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
查看全部 6 个回答

三更雨~

木虫 (文坛精英)

优秀版主


小木虫(金币+0.2):抢了个小板凳,给个红包
That is really a little
3楼2010-10-02 22:23:45
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

三更雨~

木虫 (文坛精英)

优秀版主

hehe...welcome you and have a good dream...
4楼2010-10-02 22:24:07
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

xia_chong

金虫 (文坛精英)

优秀版主

I think we should combine these two methods to cure the desease. Thank you for sharing. It is very academical. We would really appreciate it if you write down the main idea using your own language. It is also a good practice for you as your major is medical science.O(∩_∩)O~
Godhelpsthosewhohelpthemselves!
6楼2010-10-03 11:03:53
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
普通表情 高级回复 (可上传附件)
最具人气热帖推荐 [查看全部] 作者 回/看 最后发表
[硕博家园] 售SCI一区文章,我:8O5.5.1.O5.4,科目全,可伽急 +3 AVl0JAsg9hyo 2026-08-29 5/250 2026-08-30 19:57 by hZiFeudZyoGR
[找工作] 售SCI文章,我:8O5.5.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急 +4 jCd0dEvKHShX 2026-08-29 5/250 2026-08-30 19:48 by hZiFeudZyoGR
[公派出国] 售SCI一区T0P文章,我:8O.55.1.O.5.4,科目齐全,可+急 +3 jCd0dEvKHShX 2026-08-29 4/200 2026-08-30 19:34 by hZiFeudZyoGR
[公派出国] 售SCI一区T0P文章,我:8O.55.1.O.54,科目全,可伽急 +4 G6APbkg8SA6w 2026-08-29 5/250 2026-08-30 18:51 by hZiFeudZyoGR
[考博] 售SCI文章,我:8O5.5.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急 +4 G6APbkg8SA6w 2026-08-29 5/250 2026-08-30 18:50 by hZiFeudZyoGR
[论文投稿] 售SCI一区文章,我:8.O.551.O.5.4,科目全,可伽急 +5 gy1nBQXYQJqL 2026-08-29 5/250 2026-08-30 18:29 by hZiFeudZyoGR
[公派出国] 售SCI一区文章,我:8.O.55.1.O.54,科目齐全,可伽急 +5 gy1nBQXYQJqL 2026-08-29 5/250 2026-08-30 18:07 by hZiFeudZyoGR
[公派出国] 售SCI一区T0P文章,我:8.O.55.1.O.5.4,科目全,可+急 +6 ASdOkHsho7FD 2026-08-28 7/350 2026-08-30 17:14 by hZiFeudZyoGR
[硕博家园] 售SCI一区T0P文章,我:8.O55.1.O.54,科目全,可十急 +7 ASdOkHsho7FD 2026-08-28 14/700 2026-08-30 17:01 by hZiFeudZyoGR
[基金申请] 国社科又开始会评了,不知道这次命运如何 +3 雨打竹帘 2026-08-30 4/200 2026-08-30 12:35 by 白大多亮
[博后之家] 售SCI文章,我:8O.5.5.1O.54,科目全,可十急 +8 ASdOkHsho7FD 2026-08-28 9/450 2026-08-30 11:40 by l0VvVHGBGRLv
[教师之家] 导师吐槽:我怎么摊上了这么个极品研究生! +9 苏东坡二世 2026-08-23 9/450 2026-08-29 14:41 by hustersqt
[基金申请] 系统查不到 +11 董八千 2026-08-26 11/550 2026-08-28 18:06 by Leogzhya
[基金申请] 申请删除本帖 +6 lyz123lyz 2026-08-27 7/350 2026-08-27 17:31 by 宁静致远sy
[基金申请] 为什么 国际(地区)合作与交流项目 没有放榜? 10+3 majunge000 2026-08-26 11/550 2026-08-27 08:42 by 北京莱茵编辑
[基金申请] 我不理解! +15 Edward_pc 2026-08-26 23/1150 2026-08-26 20:34 by zzuzxg
[基金申请] 国合里面能看到了 +7 一怀馨秋 2026-08-26 7/350 2026-08-26 11:23 by zhaosm1982
[基金申请] 国合可查了 +3 paperzjh 2026-08-26 3/150 2026-08-26 10:41 by LemmonTr
[基金申请] 国合现在查不到了吗? +10 chengyan1220 2026-08-24 20/1000 2026-08-26 08:57 by peasantsprig
[基金申请] 牛来!米来!面来! +8 beefly 2026-08-26 8/400 2026-08-26 08:37 by xuzhipiao
信息提示
请填处理意见