Сравнение методов

	Motivational Interviewing Fidelity Coding	Treatment Fidelity Assessment
Область	Social Work	Social Work
Семейство	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Год появления	2016	2004
Автор метода	Theresa B. Moyers, William R. Miller & colleagues (CASAA, University of New Mexico)	NIH Behavior Change Consortium Treatment Fidelity Workgroup (Bellg et al.)
Тип	Observational coding system for rating fidelity to motivational interviewing	Assessment of the degree to which an intervention is delivered as intended
Основополагающий источник	Moyers, T. B., Rowell, L. N., Manuel, J. K., Ernst, D., & Houck, J. M. (2016). The Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity Code (MITI 4): Rationale, preliminary reliability and validity. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 65, 36–42.	Bellg, A. J., Borrelli, B., Resnick, B., Hecht, J., Minicucci, D. S., Ory, M., Ogedegbe, G., Orwig, D., Ernst, D., & Czajkowski, S. (2004). Enhancing treatment fidelity in health behavior change studies: Best practices and recommendations from the NIH Behavior Change Consortium. Health Psychology, 23(5), 443–451.
Другие названия	MITI, Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity, MI Fidelity Coding, MI Treatment Integrity	Treatment Integrity, Intervention Fidelity, Implementation Fidelity, Fidelity Monitoring
Связанные	4	4
Сводка	Motivational interviewing fidelity coding measures how faithfully and skillfully a practitioner delivers motivational interviewing (MI), the collaborative, change-talk-oriented counseling style. The dominant system, the Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity (MITI) code developed by Theresa Moyers, William Miller, and colleagues, has trained raters listen to recorded sessions and produce global ratings of the clinician's MI spirit alongside counts of specific behaviors, which combine into summary indices benchmarked against competency thresholds — making it a worked example of practice-specific treatment fidelity.	Treatment fidelity assessment measures the degree to which an intervention is actually delivered as it was designed — covering adherence to prescribed components, the competence with which they are delivered, the dose received, and how clearly the intervention differs from other approaches. Codified for behavioral research by the NIH Behavior Change Consortium and framed conceptually by Carroll and colleagues, it protects the validity of intervention research and the integrity of evidence-based practice by ensuring that when an intervention is studied or implemented, what was named is what was done.