Abstract

Evidence-based practice (EBP) is now the dominant model in health care; its aim is to increase the use of research evidence to inform clinical decision making. Clinical practice guidelines are the predominant method by which research is distilled into practice recommendations. Clinical psychology has its own model which promotes the integration of research evidence with clinical expertise, the scientist practitioner model (SPM). Recent developments within the United Kingdom health service, such as the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies programme have stimulated debate about the types of evidence that is often prioritised within the EBP model. This study aimed to explore these concepts with current third year clinical trainee psychologists, with a view to seeing how they construct these models. The findings suggest that the SPM may be more accurately termed the reflective-scientist-practitioner, or the critical-reflective-scientist-practitioner; in acknowledgment of the importance placed on these skills by participants who saw them as central to their role. The current study indicates participants were unaware of the APA (2006) definition of EBP; recommendations include that clinical training courses consider including teaching around both models, exploring the complexity of the underlying debates, in doing so trainees will be more informed about the models that shape their chosen profession