Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorGinsburg, Harvey
dc.contributor.authorCook, Haley Marie ( )
dc.date.accessioned2015-02-06T18:17:35Z
dc.date.available2015-02-06T18:17:35Z
dc.date.issued2014-12
dc.identifier.citationCook, H. M. (2014). Military PTSD treatments differ in strength of internal validity: A meta analysis of pharmacological, cognitivebehavioral, and non-traditional therapies (Unpublished thesis). Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas.
dc.identifier.urihttps://digital.library.txstate.edu/handle/10877/5440
dc.descriptionPresented to the Honors Committee of Texas State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For Graduation in the Honors College, December 2014.en_US
dc.description.abstractTherapies for PTSD for military veterans can be categorized as pharmacological, traditional (e.g., cognitive-behavioral therapy), or non-traditional approaches (e.g., exercise, yoga, and meditation/mindfulness). Previous meta-analyses focused exclusively on outcomes of PTSD treatment for military veterans (Stewart & Wrobel, 2009). Although treatment efficacy has been confirmed for all three approaches, the literature is sparse with regard to comparisons of methodological quality. This meta-analysis compared the methodological quality of these three broad treatment categories. From 1985-2014, 418 reports were published in 164 periodicals that were accessed via EBSCO online databases for military veterans with PTSD. There was little overlap for periodicals among the three treatment categories. Of these, 221 (53%) were empirical studies; pharmacological (n=63, 27%); traditional (n=102, 43%); and non-traditional (n=56, 24%). Reported methods describing appropriate relative comparisons and controls for fundamental confounds (e.g. pre-existing subject differences, order effects) were defined as having strong internal validity. Chi-square analysis confirmed a statistically significant difference (p=.008) between treatment types. Surprisingly, post-hoc paired-comparisons (2x2 Fisher tests, p < .001) showed that traditional cognitive-behavioral treatment had significantly weaker internal validity than the other two approaches. The expectation should be that cognitive-behavioral treatments are held to the same rigorous research standards as those of pharmacological treatments, and non-traditional treatments.en_US
dc.formatText
dc.format.extent40 pages
dc.format.medium1 file (.pdf)
dc.language.isoen
dc.subjectPTSDen_US
dc.subjectTreatmenten_US
dc.subjectInternal validityen_US
dc.subjectMilitaryen_US
dc.subjectPharmacologicalen_US
dc.subjectCognitive behavioralen_US
dc.subjectCAM treatmentsen_US
dc.titleMilitary PTSD Treatments Differ in Strength of Internal Validity: A Meta Analysis of Pharmacological, Cognitivebehavioral, and Non-Traditional Therapiesen_US
txstate.documenttypeThesis
dc.contributor.committeeMemberCeballos, Natalie
thesis.degree.departmentHonors College
thesis.degree.disciplinePsychology
thesis.degree.grantorTexas State University
txstate.departmentHonors College


Download

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record