International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology Impact Factor & Information

Journal description

International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology es una revista de Psicología Clínica y de la Salud que publica Artículos originales, Artículos de revisión, Informes breves, Casos clínicos y Revisiones de libros, con lo que la revista pretende ser un instrumento de comunicación científica de los psicólogos clínicos y psicólogos de la salud europeos y americanos.

Current impact factor: 2.79

Impact Factor Rankings

2015 Impact Factor Available summer 2016
2009 Impact Factor 1.792

Additional details

5-year impact 2.04
Cited half-life 3.70
Immediacy index 0.17
Eigenfactor 0.00
Article influence 0.25
Website International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology website
ISSN 1697-2600

Publications in this journal

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Response to psychological treatment for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD) varies, and dropout and relapse rates remain troubling. However, while studies examining symptom reductions are favourable, outcomes are less encouraging when outcome is defined in terms of clinically significant change. Moreover, there is little understanding of what predicts treatment outcome. This study examined demographic, symptomatic and cognitive predictors of outcome in 79 participants undertaking individualised cognitive-behavioural therapy for OCD. After investigating differences between treatment completers and non-completers, we examined treatment response as defined by post-treatment symptom severity and clinically reliable change, as well as predictors of treatment response. Completers were less likely to present with co-morbidity. The treatment was highly efficacious irrespective of whether completer or intention-to-treat analysis was undertaken, with 58% of treatment completers considered “recovered” at post-treatment. Lower pre-treatment levels of OCD symptoms and greater perfectionism/intolerance of uncertainty were the best unique predictors of OCD severity outcomes at post-treatment. Changes in obsessional beliefs were associated with symptomatic change, although only perfectionism/intolerance of uncertainty was a significant unique predictor of post-treatment change. Recovery status was predicted only by pre-treatment OCD severity. In helping to identify those at risk for poorer outcomes, such research can lead to the development of more effective interventions.
    International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology 08/2015; DOI:10.1016/j.ijchp.2015.07.003
  • International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology 08/2015; DOI:10.1016/j.ijchp.2015.07.001
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study aimed to analyze the effects of psychological treatments on quality of life among cancer patients and survivors. Additionally, it was explored the moderating influence of some medical- and treatment-related features on these effects. Scientific studies published between 1970 and 2012 were analyzed. Seventy-eight studies were included in a meta-analysis. Concerns related to samples, interventions, and standard of methodological evidence were explored across the studies. A significant overall effect size of psychological interventions was revealed (g=.35). Clinical state and use of adjuvant psychological treatment for managing medical side effects moderated this result (p < .05). Furthermore, a meta-regression model was showed significant (R2=.30) so as to explain the quality of life change associated with psychological interventions. The psychotherapeutic benefits on depressive symptomatology were included as a moderating factor. To sum up, quality of life is improved by psychological interventions, especially when patients have to cope with medical treatment or with adjustment after the disease is treated. Psychological treatments tend to promote better outcomes when depressive symptomatology is managed. These findings support that providing psychological treatments should be considered as crucial for the patient's health in cancer contexts.
    International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology 07/2015; DOI:10.1016/j.ijchp.2015.07.005
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Personal outcomes-related quality of life provides information about the impact of individualized supports and services that are provided to people with intellectual disability. The Personal Outcomes Scale (POS) is a valid and reliable instrument that measures these outcomes using two parts, self-report and report by others. Based on the POS, the aim of this study is to provide a new psychometric study of the instrument that allows the evaluation of the three principal informers involved in the enhancement of individual's quality of life: individual with intellectual disability, professional and family member. This approach overcomes the limitations of the POS. For the self-report were involved 529 people with intellectual disability. A professional (N = 522) and a family member (N = 462) separately participated for the report by others versions to assess personal outcomes for each participant. The reliability study provides appropriate values for the first and second order factors with α values being higher than .82. The construct validity analysis provides an adjustment of the theoretical model, particularly regarding the assessments from professionals. Results show this instrument is adequate to evaluate personal outcomes and giving the guidelines for making policy and practice decisions.
    International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology 06/2015; 13. DOI:10.1016/j.ijchp.2015.04.002