東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Comparing short-term outcomes of thr...

Soberay, Adam D.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Comparing short-term outcomes of three problem gambling treatments: A multi-group propensity score analysis.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Comparing short-term outcomes of three problem gambling treatments: A multi-group propensity score analysis./
Author:	Soberay, Adam D.
Published:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2015,
Description:	199 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-09(E), Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International76-09B(E).
Subject:	Statistics. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3689573
ISBN:	9781321690637

Comparing short-term outcomes of three problem gambling treatments: A multi-group propensity score analysis.
Soberay, Adam D.

Comparing short-term outcomes of three problem gambling treatments: A multi-group propensity score analysis. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2015 - 199 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-09(E), Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Denver, 2015.

This study applied a multi-group form of propensity score analysis to the study of outcomes related to problem gambling treatment. Across various treatment settings, it is often unfeasible or unethical to randomly assign participants to different treatment conditions, particularly when one of the conditions involves not receiving treatment. Additionally, evaluative practices often involve assessing outcomes from a primarily treatment focused setting, in which case clients are likely not randomly assigned to treatment. Consequently, where randomization does not exist, methods such as propensity score matching need to be implemented to separate what part of the observed outcomes is attributable to treatment and what part may be due to preexisting differences between the comparison groups. Traditional propensity score matching procedures involve matching and comparing across two groups, typically a treatment and a control group. This study applied newly developed methods for matching participants on propensity scores across three groups.

ISBN: 9781321690637Subjects--Topical Terms:

517247
Statistics.

Comparing short-term outcomes of three problem gambling treatments: A multi-group propensity score analysis.
LDR:03330nmm a2200325 4500 001 2157730
005 20180608102943.5
008 190424s2015 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781321690637
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI3689573
035 $a (MiAaPQ)denver:11107
035 $a AAI3689573
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Soberay, Adam D. $3 3345542
245 1 0 $a Comparing short-term outcomes of three problem gambling treatments: A multi-group propensity score analysis.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2015
300 $a 199 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-09(E), Section: B.
500 $a Adviser: Antonio Olmos.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Denver, 2015.
520 $a This study applied a multi-group form of propensity score analysis to the study of outcomes related to problem gambling treatment. Across various treatment settings, it is often unfeasible or unethical to randomly assign participants to different treatment conditions, particularly when one of the conditions involves not receiving treatment. Additionally, evaluative practices often involve assessing outcomes from a primarily treatment focused setting, in which case clients are likely not randomly assigned to treatment. Consequently, where randomization does not exist, methods such as propensity score matching need to be implemented to separate what part of the observed outcomes is attributable to treatment and what part may be due to preexisting differences between the comparison groups. Traditional propensity score matching procedures involve matching and comparing across two groups, typically a treatment and a control group. This study applied newly developed methods for matching participants on propensity scores across three groups.
520 $a This study uses archival treatment data to compare three psychotherapeutic problem gambling treatments (cognitive-behavioral therapy, solution-focused brief therapy, and time-limited dynamic psychotherapy) where outcomes were likely influenced by self-selection of form of therapy. Specifically, this study looked at whether participants improved their psychosocial functioning through five weeks of treatment, and, if so, are the three forms of treatment equally effective.
520 $a The results of this study support the utility of multi-group propensity score matching procedures. Covariate imbalance was improved through each of the four implemented matching procedures, though two of the matching procedures (caliper matching and 3:2:n matching) were more effective in reducing bias. The matching procedures also indicate that there may be a difference between treatment effects that was not observed through an unmatched analysis. The matching procedures consistently estimated the treatment effect for cognitive-behavioral therapy to be greater than that of the time-limited dynamic psychotherapy. This difference was found to be statistically significant on two of the four matching methods. Limitations of this study and recommendations for future research are also discussed.
590 $a School code: 0061.
650 4 $a Statistics. $3 517247
650 4 $a Counseling Psychology. $3 2122842
690 $a 0463
690 $a 0603
710 2 $a University of Denver. $b Quantitative Research Methods. $3 1026185
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 76-09B(E).
790 $a 0061
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2015
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3689573