Commentary: EMDR, RCTs, and the proliferation of trademarked acronyms

Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), while recognized as evidence-based, continues to be viewed as a novel and controversial treatment. At the same time, numerous alternative eye movement therapies have been introduced, each of which requires its own set of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess remarkable claims of cure. The present situation is untenable in our opinion because any clever entrepreneur can claim a new method and trademark a new acronym. Recommendations are made for more stringent criteria to establish science-based methods that guide clinical practice.

Journal

English

Gerald M. Rosen
Willem van der Does
Brandon A. Gaudiano
Loren Pankratz
Glen I. Spielmans
Steven Hollon
Gerald C. Davison

Rosen, G. M., van der Does, W., Gaudiano, B. A., Pankratz, L., Spielmans, G. I., Hollong, S., & Davison, G. C. (2024). Commentary: EMDR, RCTs, and the proliferation of trademarked acronyms. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy,  54, 99–102 doi:10.1007/s10879-023-09606-6