Translating Evidence-Based Assessment Principles and Components Into Clinical Practice Settings

• I highlight common elements in the articles in the Special Section on Evidence-Based Assessment.
• A central element is the use of science to inform assessment activities.
• When conducting assessment, both nomothetic and idiographic measures should be used.
• To guide treatment, diagnosis-informed case conceptualizations and using treatment monitoring data should be used.
• I suggest the use of a social validity framework to address concerns about the implementation of EBA in clinical practice.

In this comment I describe the common elements of evidence-based assessment (EBA) emphasized in the articles comprising this special series: the use of science to inform assessment activities; the use of nomothetic and idiographic assessment measures; the development of case conceptualizations that include, but are not limited to, diagnoses; and a reliance on treatment monitoring strategies to inform the ongoing provision of treatment. Focusing on treatment monitoring as an exemplar of EBA, I examine clinicians’ objections to these procedures as a way of understanding broader concerns about the possible downside of incorporating EBA practices into clinical settings. In this context, the use of a social validity framework to understand and address these concerns has the potential to enhance the translation of EBA principles and components into clinical practice and, ultimately, improve our clinical services.