Why Evidence-Based Treatment Should Just Be the Start

Throughout my education and training as a psychologist, I repeatedly encountered familiar terms and phrases used to describe the work we do. In psychological assessment, there was often talk of following the “preponderance of data.” In psychotherapy, the big one was “evidence-based treatment.”

The latter always struck me as somewhat funny. The phrase “evidence-based treatment” (EBT) feels redundant—after all, shouldn’t all psychological treatment be grounded in evidence? Over time, I think the term has started to lose its meaning.

What “Evidence-Based” Was Supposed to Mean

To be clear, my intention isn’t to criticize those who use EBT to describe their approach. Many clinicians I respect use this language to convey that their work is rooted in research and guided by proven methods—including myself.

I also recognize that for clients unfamiliar with therapy, seeing a psychologist describe their practice as “evidence-based” can be comforting. It gives the impression of professionalism and legitimacy. Still, I imagine others might pause and wonder, “Isn’t that just what therapy is supposed to be?”

It’s Not About the Label—It’s About the Application

My own orientation is cognitive-behavioral (CBT), and I frequently use Exposure with Response Prevention (ERP) to treat anxiety, OCD, and related conditions. These modalities are backed by decades of rigorous research, and I appreciate their ability to yield concrete data showing progress.

That said, CBT and ERP are not the only evidence-based therapies. Relational and psychodynamic approaches also have empirical support demonstrating how the therapeutic relationship itself can foster meaningful change. The truth is that most established therapeutic modalities have evidence behind them. What matters is how thoughtfully and competently they are implemented.

When “Evidence-Based” Becomes a Buzzword

The issue is not whether a treatment is evidence-based—it’s how we use and communicate that evidence. When a term becomes a marketing buzzword, it starts to lose its value. One of my graduate professors once said that what separates us from “just talking to your grandparents about your problems” is our grounding in research and best practice. Evidence-based treatment should be a given, not a selling point.

What Clients Really Deserve

So when I hear colleagues describe their work as “evidence-based,” I find myself more curious than anything else. I want to know what evidence, how it’s applied, and why it matters for the client sitting in front of them. Saying “I use EBT” is no longer enough. What clients deserve—and what the field needs—are clinicians who can translate that evidence into meaningful, individualized care, and who can explain what that actually looks like in practice.

If we truly want to set ourselves apart, it’s not by saying we’re “evidence-based.” It’s by showing that we understand the evidence, apply it with intention, and can articulate how it serves the unique person we’re trying to help. That’s what makes therapy both a science and an art—and why evidence-based treatment should just be the start. I am confident and hopeful that most of my colleagues already strive to do this in their own practice.