This shorter communication explores the concept of clinically significant change in treatment outcome studies for hoarding disorder. We argue that cross-study comparisons have been hindered due to researchers using different formulations to assess individual change. We propose that researchers adopt a standardized approach to calculating rates of clinically significant change for the Saving Inventory-Revised (SI-R) based on Jacobson and Truax's (1991) two-step method. Specifically, we recommend that individuals whose SI-R total scores have reduced by at least 20 points and whose post-treatment score is 38 or less be classified as recovered. Individuals whose total score decreases by 20 points or more, but whose post-treatment score remains above 38, should be classified as improved but not recovered. Individuals whose total score increases by 20 or more points should be classified as deteriorated. Any individual whose total score has changed by less than 20 points should be classified as not changed. By adopting these criteria, researchers will facilitate cross-study treatment outcome comparisons and aid in our understanding of the impact that hoarding treatment has on its recipients.
|Number of pages||4|
|Journal||Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders|
|Publication status||Published - Jan 2021|
- hoarding disorder
- outcome assessment
- treatment outcome
- reproducibility of results