Salvato in:
| Autori principali: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Natura: | Artículo Open Access |
| Pubblicazione: |
Wiley
2025
|
| Soggetti: | |
| Accesso online: | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cpp.70073 |
| Tags: |
Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
|
| _version_ | 1867012429114769408 |
|---|---|
| author | Arianna Palmieri Valentina Cimmino Picone Alessandro Gennaro Davide Ruffin Valeria Capuani Johann Roland Kleinbub |
| author_facet | Arianna Palmieri Valentina Cimmino Picone Alessandro Gennaro Davide Ruffin Valeria Capuani Johann Roland Kleinbub Arianna Palmieri Valentina Cimmino Picone Alessandro Gennaro Davide Ruffin Valeria Capuani Johann Roland Kleinbub |
| collection | Wiley Open Access |
| contents | Strengths and Limits of Psychodynamic Intervention Rating Scale (PIRS) in Capturing Psychotherapeutic Micro‐Process: A Systematic Review Arianna Palmieri Valentina Cimmino Picone Alessandro Gennaro Davide Ruffin Valeria Capuani Johann Roland Kleinbub Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy ABSTRACT Background The Psychodynamic Intervention Rating Scale (PIRS) stands out as one of the most widely utilised coding systems aimed at categorising micro‐process from psychotherapeutic dialogue due to its feasibility and adherence to the expressive–supportive continuum. Despite this, no comprehensive analysis of its application in the literature has been published. This systematic review aims to examine the state of the art, strengths, limitations and future perspectives of such a coding tool for verbatim transcripts. Methods Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic search in databases (PsycINFO, Scopus, PubMed and Web of Science) covering publications from the PIRS's first occurrence in the scientific literature in 1992 to 2024 yielded 22 publications eligible for review. Three independent reviewers screened the studies and extracted data regarding PIRS applications and key findings. Results The studies examined revealed that PIRS can reliably classify interventions across various therapeutic approaches, surpassing its psychodynamic origins. It demonstrated peculiar efficacy in understanding therapeutic alliance mechanisms and patients' responses according to their typical defensive patterns. However, the findings also indicated some limitations concerning the breadth of PIRS categories, which may overlook the essential nuances of micro‐processes. Conclusions While the PIRS has proven its value for understanding clinical micro‐process, its categories may be slightly refined. A proposal for a more granular classification of PIRS categories has finally been provided via a literature analysis. 10.1002/cpp.70073 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1002/cpp.70073 |
| format | Artículo Open Access |
| id | wiley_oa_10_1002_cpp_70073 |
| institution | Wiley Open Access |
| license_str_mv | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | wiley_oa |
| spellingShingle | Strengths and Limits of Psychodynamic Intervention Rating Scale (PIRS) in Capturing Psychotherapeutic Micro‐Process: A Systematic Review Arianna Palmieri Valentina Cimmino Picone Alessandro Gennaro Davide Ruffin Valeria Capuani Johann Roland Kleinbub Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy Strengths and Limits of Psychodynamic Intervention Rating Scale (PIRS) in Capturing Psychotherapeutic Micro‐Process: A Systematic Review Arianna Palmieri Valentina Cimmino Picone Alessandro Gennaro Davide Ruffin Valeria Capuani Johann Roland Kleinbub Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy ABSTRACT Background The Psychodynamic Intervention Rating Scale (PIRS) stands out as one of the most widely utilised coding systems aimed at categorising micro‐process from psychotherapeutic dialogue due to its feasibility and adherence to the expressive–supportive continuum. Despite this, no comprehensive analysis of its application in the literature has been published. This systematic review aims to examine the state of the art, strengths, limitations and future perspectives of such a coding tool for verbatim transcripts. Methods Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic search in databases (PsycINFO, Scopus, PubMed and Web of Science) covering publications from the PIRS's first occurrence in the scientific literature in 1992 to 2024 yielded 22 publications eligible for review. Three independent reviewers screened the studies and extracted data regarding PIRS applications and key findings. Results The studies examined revealed that PIRS can reliably classify interventions across various therapeutic approaches, surpassing its psychodynamic origins. It demonstrated peculiar efficacy in understanding therapeutic alliance mechanisms and patients' responses according to their typical defensive patterns. However, the findings also indicated some limitations concerning the breadth of PIRS categories, which may overlook the essential nuances of micro‐processes. Conclusions While the PIRS has proven its value for understanding clinical micro‐process, its categories may be slightly refined. A proposal for a more granular classification of PIRS categories has finally been provided via a literature analysis. 10.1002/cpp.70073 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
| title | Strengths and Limits of Psychodynamic Intervention Rating Scale (PIRS) in Capturing Psychotherapeutic Micro‐Process: A Systematic Review |
| topic | Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy |
| url | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cpp.70073 |