Talk:Intensive short-term dynamic psychotherapy

Major Revision

Finally bit the bullet and brought the whole article more into conformity with a proper encylopedic tone, got rid of inflammatory language, rewrote rhetorical devices (especially the leading questions), and greatly expanded the references. I believe the article is stronger for it and is more reflective of what Wikipedia strives to be.

Rtarzwell (talk) 06:59, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Limited

I appreciate the author's enthusiasm to learn Davanloo's Intensive Short-Term Dynamic Psychotherepy (DISTDP) and share his interest with others by publishing this article. He, however displays a limited knowledge of many aspects of DISTDP. To detail these would require a line by line commentary and is more than I am prepared to do.

A better option would be to point interested parties to Dr. Davanloo's own recent summary of his technique:

Davanloo, H: "Intensive Short-Term Dynamic Psychotherapy", in: Kaplan H., and Sadock B. (eds), Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry, 8th ed, Vol 2, Chapter 30.9, 2628-2652, Lippincot Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, 2005

Jim Schubmehl, MD Clinical Associate Professor Department of Psychiatry University of Rochester and President Rochester Institute for Davanloo's Intensive Short-Term dynamic Psychotherapy

Hi Jim. I added the K&S Comprehensive reference to the first paragraph of the article. Thanks for supplying it.

Please feel free to dive in and supplement my article at those points where you feel it could benefit from buttressing. When I submitted this article, I wanted to strike a balance between scholarly precision and accessibility to a non-technical audience. I've tried to keep definitions clear and simple, though I recognize this can lead to a loss of precision. So, yes, my goal was to display limited knowledge. I had hoped others might follow along and contribute amplifying articles which unpack some of the nuances of the technique. An introductory primer didn't seem the place to do that.

--Robert Tarzwell —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.46.15.8 (talk) 22:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Questions

Article contains questions, these should be removed. - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 05:43, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi RoyBoy. The questions are contained within quotations from clinical dialogue with patients. The dialogue samples are meant to demonstrate the techniques discussed. Removing them would greatly hinder the reader's abillity to get a feel for what some of the elements a therapy session might contain.

Hello from Switzerland ! I just edited the german article about ISTDP and I was sth like in conflict. The conflict of writing as much as could be usefull for everybody or writing for therapists in training. And as I think the powerfull technique is difficult to learn I decided not to present therapeutic interventions in detail. With this I want to save the technique from bodies using elements of istdp without enough knowledge. By this I would recommend to skip the vocabulary for interventions and write for a informed public to inform, not to give detailed knowledge for therapists. This could Be placed elsewhere.

Robert, thanks for putting the literature Database in ! I was lucky to refer to this in the german article ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Capuns (talk • contribs) 20:00, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on the German translation! Consider putting a link to that translation in the left column of the main article under the "Languages" header once it's finalized and up. I don't quite follow your question/comment about including technical information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.173.54.11 (talk) 02:30, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Notability?

It looks like the only sources that talk about Intensive short-term dynamic psychotherapy are by the author of the theory. That suggests it is not widely known, or suitable for Wikipedia. The article needs independent sources that discuss the subject. Sionk (talk) 11:57, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the query. There is actually a full chapter on ISTDP in Kaplan and Sadock's Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry, the English language standard textbook of psychiatry worldwide. Didactic lectures are taught on ISTDP as part of the brief psychodynamic psychotherapies in most psychiatric residency programs in North America. I myself am a Clinical Assistant Professor on the faculty of medicine at UBC and both practice and teach the technique. There are training and research centres in Montreal, Los Angeles, New York, Switzerland, France, Sweden and a new institute in Australia. In the references section, note is made of both published and ongoing research in the technique by multiple investigators. I thought this was quite clearly laid out in the article. Would a partial rewrite or edit help bring this into sharper focus? Rtarzwell (talk) 05:57, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Just went through all the inline citations supplying author names, particularly for the articles from medical journals. Also added numerous texts from reputable academic publishers to the Further Reading list. Will this suffice to establish notability? Rtarzwell (talk) 07:53, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

It's been over 2 weeks since I addressed the notability concerns by adding numerous secondary sources of high quality and brought this action to your attention both here and on your Talk page. I've looked at the Notability guidelines, and other than establishing notability by the use of appropriate secondary sources, no next steps for tagged articles are identified. In the absence of guidance, I'm going to assume that silence implies consent, and I am removing the tag, because I believe I've fulfilled the requirements of notability in good faith. If there are specific steps beyond what I've done, I'd surely like to know them, and I'll happily fulfill them. Until then, I believe I'm following a reasonable course of action and fully disclosing it. Rtarzwell (talk) 06:57, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

"developed by"

We cannot say Davanloo developed it without a source other than himself. DGG ( talk ) 02:35, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Criticisms?

There has recently been made criticisms in several media outlets that probably should be discussed as well. In order to maintain a non-biased or at least nuanced article. 84.202.12.137 (talk) 19:21, 2 December 2021 (UTC)