1. Chapter 9 Improving the Scientific Base of Social Work Practice

2. History of the Research- Practice Chasm
Social work’s resistance to scientific method.
Research findings concluded social work was not effective (Fisher, 1973; Mullen & Dumpson, 1972; Wood, 1978).
Empirical Clinical Practice Movement emerged as a way to close the research-practice gap, emphasizing the need to rely on scientific evidence to inform practice decisions & evaluate the outcomes using valid measurement instruments.

3. Efforts From the 1990s to Present Day
New Social Work Research Organizations:
Society for Social Work Research
The Institute for the Advancement of Social Work Research
Epistemological Wars
Inappropriate conflation of postmodernism with qualitative inquiry
Evidence-Based Practice Movement – Is it different than past efforts? How can it be made feasible for social work practice?

4. Hierarchy of Evidence There are many types of EBP questions.
The hierarchy of evidence appropriate for answering EBP questions depends on the kind of question.
For example:
Effectiveness questions: Meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials are the gold standard.
Understanding in-depth experiences or meaning: Qualitative inquiry is the gold standard.

5. Erosion of Evidentiary Standards
Some academics and practitioners prioritize clinical expertise over high-quality research studies, and view studies with relatively weak designs as enough evidence to call an intervention or program “evidence-based.”
Published research literature tends to overstate the effectiveness of research. Some practitioners may not be able to differentiate between strong and weak studies.
What is considered “evidence-based” may become meaningless.

6. Making Social Work More Scientific
Educational strategies
Extensive curriculum changes
Accreditation
Challenge: Faculty have disparate views on evidence-based practice and what constitutes evidence.
Professional publications
Assess articles for appropriate causal inferences based on the quality of the design.
Remind practitioners that any one study, in and of itself, is not cause for considering an intervention “evidence-based.”