Research Reports

Implementation of the Evidence-Based Practice in Psychology in Ukraine: Prediction Model Development

Mariana Velykodna1,2, Gelena Lazos1, Liudmyla Karamushka1,3, Ivan Klymenko1, Vladyslav Deputatov1, Tetiana Pysarenko1
[1] Psychology Department, Ukraine Sigmund Freud University, Kyiv, Ukraine. [2] Practical Psychology Department, Kryvyi Rih State Pedagogical University, Kryvyi Rih, Ukraine. [3] Psychology Department, State University of Economics and Technology, Kryvyi Rih, Ukraine.

Europe's Journal of Psychology, 2026, Vol. 22(1), 67–88, https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.14559

Received: 2024-05-05. Accepted: 2025-08-14. Published (VoR): 2026-02-27.

Handling Editor: Annalisa Valle, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore; Milan, Italy

Corresponding Author: Mariana Velykodna, Psychology Department, Ukraine Sigmund Freud University, Klovskyi uzviz, 7, 01021, Kyiv, Ukraine.

Open Data BadgeOpen Materials Badge
Supplementary Materials: Data, Materials [see Index of Supplementary Materials]

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, CC BY 4.0, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Objective: By 2021, researchers reported limited access to evidence-based mental health interventions in Ukraine, which became more crucial after the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Evidence-based practice in psychology (EBPP) requires professionals to consider equal contributions of the best available research, practical experience, and the context of the unique client. This study aimed to reveal the possible predictors of EBPP implementation among Ukrainian psychologists (n = 366) by developing and testing multivariable prediction models. Methods: The research design followed the methodology of “Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis” — TRIPOD checklist. The online survey included a questionnaire on sociodemographic characteristics, educational and professional background, and a purposely developed part regarding the knowledge, attitudes, and utilization of the EBPP approach. Results: Regression analysis revealed different prediction models for the belief that the respondent implements EBPP and the intensity of EBPP elements implementation, explaining 24.4% and 18.5% of their variance with 3 and 5 predictors, respectively. Conclusion: Psychologists believed they were implementing EBPP when they used interventions/methods with proven efficacy, were members of psychological associations, and assessed their knowledge regarding EBPP higher. However, more intensive use of EBPP elements was predicted by a psychologist’s experience in personal therapy and supervision, a positive attitude toward EBPP elements, membership in a psychological association, and a perceived level of knowledge regarding EBPP. The belief that the psychologist’s practice aligns with the EBPP requirements and the intensity of using EBPP elements had a rather moderate correlation.

Keywords: attitudes, evidence-based practice, evidence-based practice in psychology, knowledge, mental health, psychology

Evidence-based practice in psychology (EBPP) was designed to enforce outcomes of psychological interventions by integrating the best available research, clinical experience extracted from practice, and a client’s specifics, including culture and values (APA, 2006) as equally important components in the professional’s decision-making. The EBPP promotion, first initiated by the American Psychological Association and supported by the Canadian Psychological Association, valuably contributed to the ongoing worldwide discussion of:

  1. What the best research is and what the psychologist’s ability to understand it critically is required (APA, 2006; CPA, 2012; Middleton et al., 2020).

  2. How the evidence could be implemented in practice or learned from practice (Boswell & Schwartzman, 2024; Waltman et al., 2020).

  3. What specifics of clients should be addressed by tailoring psychological interventions and how (Melgarejo et al., 2020; Pfeiffer et al., 2023).

Among the advantages of the EBPP, practitioners mention its impact in promoting mental health and effective psychological practice, and in outcome improvement (Middleton et al., 2020) as well as clarifying psychologists’ roles in collecting, summarizing, and implementing the research evidence in regard to practice (Spring & Neville, 2010). Among the disadvantages and barriers to EBPP implementation, scholars notice its possible excessive scientization, which means making it too complicated for practical understanding because of using scientific terms (Berg, 2019), and less valued practice-based evidence (i.e., evidence extracted from practice) compared to research findings (Boswell & Schwartzman, 2024) prevalent or set by policies in specific countries. Practitioners also reported that implementing the EBPP approach may be challenging due to the lack of time and money for updating knowledge (Meyer et al., 2020) and the non-applicability of research extracted from ideal conditions of randomized controlled trials (RCT) to real clinical practice (Nelson et al., 2006).

Research reveals that a lack of knowledge of what exactly the EBPP is leads to psychologists’ resistance to its implementation (Klymenko et al., 2025; Lilienfeld et al., 2013). No less important is that previous research demonstrated that the lack of sufficient knowledge regarding the EBPP could be manifested in confusing it with evidence-based treatments (EBT), i.e., specific interventions or methods with proven efficacy that are not necessarily practiced by a specific mental health professional using the frame of the EBPP (DiMeo et al., 2012; Newburg, 2020), which was also observed in Ukraine (Lazos et al., 2024). Although utilizing EBT or so-called empirically supported treatments (ESTs) plays a valuable role in the practice’s relevance to research (Shedler, 2018), its confusion with EBPP may pose a risk of developing a psychologist’s belief that they implement EBPP while practicing any method with proven efficacy. Instead, within the EBPP approach, a psychologist should not overestimate or underestimate EBT compared to a client’s values and preferences or their own practical experience (Berg, 2020) but consider them as equal contributions to the process of decision-making (Newburg, 2020).

In Ukraine, research revealed a lack of knowledge regarding evidence-based practice before the 2022 Russian invasion (Hook et al., 2021) and after it (Velykodna et al., 2025). The few works published in Ukraine devoted to this topic have focused only on EBT (e.g., Chaban, 2019; Sochenko & Gabińska, 2017; Velykodna, 2023). The 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine resulted in a mental health crisis associated with both the terrible consequences of war (Lushchak et al., 2024; Pavlova et al., 2024) and the unpreparedness of the mental health care system (Seleznova et al., 2023). Widespread traumatization among Ukrainian children and adults required appropriate evidence-based solutions (Pfeiffer et al., 2023). To address this gap, in 2022–2023, various psychological associations in Ukraine collaborated with EBPP experts from abroad to provide their members with lectures on EBPP (Palii et al., 2024).

In 2024, the Order of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine (January 25, 2024, No. 129/41474), for the first time, defined a list of psychotherapy methods (interventions, techniques) with proven efficacy relevant to a particular disorder or condition, as well as recommended tools for psychological assessment, legal to be implemented in Ukraine (Ministry of Health of Ukraine, 2024). However, this solution legitimates and promotes the EBT, while EBPP has no official status to date of research. As a result, the prevalence of EBPP implementation in Ukraine, as well as the facilitating factors and barriers, are not yet known.

Therefore, this paper focuses on revealing the possible predictors of EBPP implementation among Ukrainian psychologists by developing and testing multivariable prediction models regarding its cognitive and behavioral aspects, which would contribute to planning further dissemination of EBPP in Ukraine.

Method

Study Design

This study followed the TRIPOD Checklist for Prediction Model Development (Collins et al., 2015) in organizing and reporting procedures.

Theoretical Framework

We developed a theoretical framework indicating a psychologist’s Belief that they implement EBPP and the Intensity of the implementation of EBPP as outcomes in this study, representing cognitive and behavioral aspects of EBPP implementation. Perceived quality of university education regarding EBPP, number and location (i.e., in Ukraine or abroad) of graduated universities, attitudes to EBPP elements, perceived level of knowledge regarding EBPP, work experience, membership with a psychological association, experience to be a client and supervisee, being trained to use a method with proven efficacy, age, and gender were tested as potential predictors in this study (Figure 1). All the potential predictors were grouped as representing the Educational background, Post-graduate experience, and EBPP utilization experience extracted from the literature review.

Click to enlarge
ejop.14559-f1
Figure 1

Theoretical Framework

Research Questions

Following the theoretical framework, we aimed to develop multivariable prediction models for the psychologists’ Belief that they implement EBPP and the Intensity of the implementation of EBPP with three research questions:

  1. What prediction model better forecasts the Belief of Ukrainian psychologists that they implement EBPP?

  2. What prediction model better prognoses the Intensity of the implementation of EBPP among Ukrainian psychologists?

  3. What is the relationship between the Belief that they implement EBPP and the Intensity of the implementation of EBPP in this sample?

Participants

Ukrainian psychologists who hold a university diploma in psychology and conduct psychological practice in its broad meaning (e.g., all types of professional activities of a psychologist allowed in Ukraine, such as clinical assessment, research, counseling, low-intensive and crisis interventions, psychoeducation, and, with appropriate additional education, psychotherapy) were invited to participate voluntarily in this study. We aimed to attract participants with different backgrounds and from different regions of Ukraine, which was monitored during the data collection process.

Survey Development

Considering wartime, an online survey was considered appropriate for this study, as it allowed Ukrainian psychologists from different locations to be contacted in a short time frame and provided confidentiality. A questionnaire included sociodemographic data, educational background, various working experiences, and purposely developed questions to measure EBPP attitudes and implementation. Most of the questions regarding EBPP (e.g., quality of university education, perceived level of knowledge regarding EBPP, attitudes to EBPP elements as valuable or not, and intensity of their implementation) were formulated as 7-point Likert scales. All variables and relevant data types are listed in Table A1 of the Appendix.

Belief That a Psychologist Implements EBPP

This variable was measured using a 5-point Likert scale to the question, “To what extent do you implement the EBPP approach?” (1 – Not at all; 5 – To a large extent). Additionally, this question was provided with a response option “I do not know” (0), which allowed identifying respondents who did not know what EBPP was and excluding them from the development of the prediction model of this outcome.

Intensity of the Implementation of EBPP

To assess the Intensity of the implementation of EBPP elements, we purposely developed a 6-item scale with each two items representing one theorizing EBPP element and tested its factor structure (See Table 1). The respondents assessed the items with a 7-point Likert scale regarding how often they implement the listed EBPP elements as follows: Daily (7); Several times a week (6); Several times a month (5); Several times a year (4); Annually (3); Once every two to five years (2); Less than once in five years (1). As an outcome of this study, we used a coefficient calculated as the sum of these scales divided by the number of items (6). Therefore, the index of Intensity of the implementation of EBPP could be scored from 1 to 7 for each survey participant.

Table 1

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) of the Developed Scale for the Intensity of the Implementation of EBPP Elements Assessment

CFA
ScaleItemsCFITLIRMSEACI 95%p-value
Considering the best available research.Updating knowledge about the possibilities and limits of using a particular method or intervention..996.991.035.00–.087<.001
Updating knowledge about the peculiarities of working with certain issues, requests, and personality types.<.001
Considering practical experience.Analysis of own practical experience (e.g., through supervision and discussions with colleagues).<.001
Analysis of the practical experience of colleagues (e.g., through supervision, discussions with colleagues, and clinical ateliers).<.001
Considering the client's sociocultural specifics and preferences.Taking into account the sociocultural characteristics of a particular client (and appropriate choice or modification of the approach, method, and technique).<.001
Taking into account the personal preferences of the client (and the appropriate choice or modification of the approach, method, and technique).<.001

Data Collection

The invitation for participation in the survey was distributed online through emails and social media platforms of the largest psychologists’ associations in Ukraine (National Psychological Association, Ukrainian Union of Psychotherapists). Psychologists were invited to participate voluntarily in the survey regarding their attitudes to EBPP and could withdraw from participation at any time. The survey responses were collected from December 14, 2023, till March 7, 2024, via the SurveyMonkey platform. Written consent forms for participation were collected along with survey responses.

Overall, 449 Ukrainian psychologists confirmed they received the invitation to fill in the survey. Among them, 81.5% (n = 366) provided complete responses used in data analysis. Incomplete responses were excluded from data analysis.

Data Analysis

Data analysis included descriptive statistics, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), linear regression analysis, and Pearson correlation calculation using the R-based software Jamovi 2.3.28. The data and Jamovi logs are available at the Open Science Framework repository at Velykodna and Deputatov (2024).

Results

Participants

Overall, 366 Ukrainian psychologists aged 21 to 67 (M = 38.3; SD = 9.54) with 1–37 years of work experience (M = 8.4; SD = 7.03) provided complete responses to the questionnaire. Most of them were middle-career females currently located in Ukraine who had graduated from Ukrainian universities. The full sociodemographic characteristics gathered from the survey are presented in Table 2.

Table 2

Sociodemographic Characteristics and Professional Background of the Sample

Characteristicn%
Gender
Male287.7
Female33892.3
Current residence
In Ukraine30182.2
Abroad6517.8
Academic degrees in Psychology (multiple choice)
Bachelor10528.69
Master26271.58
Doctoral Degree4412.02
Field of practice (multiple choice)
Education7721.04
Science226.01
Mental Health4813.11
Social work6918.85
Military184.92
Law82.19
Business215.74
Private practice24968.03
Other20.55
Learned method(s) with proven efficacy
Yes28289.2
No3410.8
Membership in any psychological association
Yes24968
No11732
Personal therapy experience
Yes29493
No227
Less than 50 hours4313.61
51 to 100 hours5617.72
101 to 200 hours6119.3
201 to 300 hours5015.82
More than 300 hours8426.58
Supervision experience
Yes29292.4
No247.6
Less than 50 hours9329.43
50 to 100 hours6420.25
100 to 200 hours6319.94
200 to 300 hours288.86
More than 300 hours4413.92
Location of graduated universities (multiple choice)
In Ukraine35797.5
Abroad297.9
M (SD)Me (min-max)
Age38.3 (9.54)38 (21–67)
Number of graduated universities1.54 (.383)1 (1–5)
Work experience (in years)8.4 (7.03)5 (1–37)

Most respondents held master’s diplomas in psychology (71.58%), were members of psychological societies (68.03%), and were trained to provide at least one intervention/psychotherapy method with proven efficacy (77.05%). Among the 29 methods and interventions, psychologists mentioned psychoanalytic psychotherapy (23.50%), art therapy (21.31%), cognitive-behavioral (21.31%), and gestalt therapy (17.76%) most often.

The variance of predictors and outcomes within the sample is presented in Table 3.

Table 3

Descriptive Statistics of all Variables (Measured Predictors and Outcomes)

VariablesRange (Min–Max)MSDSEMe
Quality of university education regarding EBPP.1–741.71.094
Perceived level of knowledge regarding EBPP.1–75.111.31.075
Attitude toward EBPP elements
Updating knowledge about the possibilities and limits of using a particular method or intervention.1–76.44.85.047
Updating knowledge about the peculiarities of working with certain issues, requests, and personality types.1–76.55.73.047
Analysis of own practical experience (e.g., through supervision and discussions with colleagues).1–76.65.74.047
Analysis of the practical experience of colleagues (e.g., through supervision, discussions with colleagues, and clinical ateliers).2–76.33.85.047
Taking into account the sociocultural characteristics of a particular client (and appropriate choice or modification of the approach, method, and technique).1–76.19.98.056
Taking into account the personal preferences of the client (and the appropriate choice or modification of the approach, method, and technique).1–75.861.15.066
Considering the best available research scale.3–1412.991.44.0814
Considering the practical experience scale.3–1412.981.46.0814
Considering the client's sociocultural specifics and preferences scale.2–1412.051.92.112
Index of Attitude toward EBPP elements (Overall/6).2.33–76.34.65.036.5
Belief that a psychologist implements EBPP.1–53.920.990.054
0 (‘I do not know’)n = 267.1%
Intensity of the implementation of EBPP elements
Updating knowledge about the possibilities and limits of using a particular method or intervention.1–74.261.16.064
Updating knowledge about the peculiarities of working with certain issues, requests, and personality types.2–74.421.03.054
Analysis of own practical experience (e.g., through supervision and discussions with colleagues).1–74.591.02.055
Analysis of the practical experience of colleagues (e.g., through supervision, discussions with colleagues, and clinical ateliers).1–74.541.055
Taking into account the sociocultural characteristics of a particular client (and appropriate choice or modification of the approach, method, and technique).1–74.581.44.085
Taking into account the personal preferences of the client (and the appropriate choice or modification of the approach, method, and technique).1–74.971.42.075
Considering the best available research scale.3–148.691.97.18
Considering the practical experience scale.2–149.141.87.110
Considering the client's sociocultural specifics and preferences scale.2–149.542.62.1410
Index of the intensity of the implementation of EBPP elements (Overall/6).1.83–6.834.560.78.044.67

Interestingly, 1.64% of the surveyed psychologists assessed their knowledge regarding EBPP as ‘nothing’ and 4.1% as ‘almost nothing’, while 7.1% responded that they did not know if they implemented EBPP. Pearson correlation analysis revealed a moderate relationship between the Belief that a psychologist implements EBPP and the Intensity of EBPP elements implementation by them (r = .196, p < .001; CI 95%: .082–.304).

Models Development

The development of prediction models was performed as follows. The hypothesized models proposed in the theoretical framework (Figure 1) were tested via linear regression analysis by adding variables one by one as possible predictors to the calculation. Each tested variable remained in the prediction model or was rejected depending on its p-value (p < .05 was estimated as a cutoff for this process). Changes in the p-value of other model variables were also considered when adding each subsequent predictor. If adding a new statistically significant predictor made the previously added predictors insignificant and vice versa, the predictor with a larger β-value that resulted in a larger R2 remained in the model.

Models’ Performance

Following the described procedure, we developed two prediction models for the Belief that a psychologist implements EBPP and the Intensity of EBPP elements implementation, explaining 24.4% (F = 30.8, p < .001, adjusted R2 = .236) and 18.5% (F = 14.1, p < .001, adjusted R2 = .172) of their variance with 3 and 5 predictors, respectively. Two variables — Membership in psychological association and the Perceived level of knowledge regarding EBPP — significantly contributed to both models.

The developed prediction models for the Belief that a psychologist implements EBPP and the Intensity of EBPP elements implementation were summarized in Table 4.

Table 4

Regression Coefficients

95% CI
VariableEstimate (β)SE[LL, UL]p
Model 1. Belief that a psychologist implements EBPP
Intercept.1.437.29.866, 2.008<.001
Learned method with proven efficacy..9080.194.526, 1.29<.001
Membership in a psychological association..501.127.25, .751<.001
Perceived knowledge regarding EBPP..237.046.146, .327<.001
Model 2. Intensity of implementing EBPP
Intercept.1.516.444.643, 2.389<.001
Supervision experience..367.167.038, .696.029
Positive attitude to EBPP..254.065.127, .382<.001
Membership in a psychological association..236.101.038, .435.02
Perceived knowledge regarding EBPP..103.034.036, .17.003
Personal therapy experience..41.167.081, .739.015

Note. CI = Confidence Interval; LL = Lower Limit; UL = Upper Limit.

The strongest variable that predicted psychologists’ Belief that they implement EBPP was that they provided Interventions/methods with proven efficacy (β = .908, p < .001). Almost two times less influential was the psychologist’s Membership in psychological association (β = .501, p < .001), followed by the Perceived level of knowledge regarding EBPP (β = .237, p < .001). Instead, the strongest predictors for the Intensity of EBPP elements implementation were Personal therapy of the psychologist (β = .41, p = .015) and Supervision (β = .367, p = .029), which, however, had rather large standard error and p-value. They were followed by a Positive attitude to EBPP elements (β = .254, p < .001) and Membership in psychological association (β = .236, p = .02). The Perceived level of knowledge regarding EBPP (β = .101, p = .003) was performed as the weakest but significant predictor in this model.

Interestingly, work experience and educational background (e.g., number and location of universities, satisfaction with the quality of university education regarding EBPP), as well as age and gender, did not predict the studied outcomes in this sample.

Discussion

Current challenges in providing mental health care in Ukraine after the 2022 Russian invasion encompass accessibility, continuity, and integrity issues (Palii et al., 2024). EBPP utilization is considered empowering psychologists in their clinical thinking and decision-making aimed at offering the best available intervention adjusted to a specific client (Lazos et al., 2024).

This study aimed to reveal the predictors of cognitive and behavioral aspects of EBPP implementation among Ukrainian psychologists using the theoretical framework extracted from a literature review. Within the theoretical framework, we tested a list of variables grouped as relevant to Educational background, Post-graduate experience, and EBPP Knowledge and Attitudes in predicting EBPP practice. The obtained results succeeded in predicting 24.4% of the variance of psychologists’ Beliefs that they implement EBPP and 18.5% of the Intensity of EBPP elements implementation, which is considered acceptable for social science research (Ozili, 2023). However, further research is needed, focusing on seeking possible additional predictors of the EBPP implementation among Ukrainian psychologists extracted from qualitative data, which would be more appropriate considering the result that about 7% of the surveyed psychologists knew very little about EBPP and were not sure if they implemented it or not to any extent. No less important is that the current study's findings contribute to the evidence that cognitive and behavioral aspects of EBPP implementation do not necessarily match (e.g., Jiménez-Pérez & Vargas-Contreras, 2020) and reveal some specifics of their predictors as follows.

Generally, the final developed prediction models included 6 variables related to the respondents’ Education (being trained to utilize EBT), Post-graduate Experience (personal therapy, supervision, membership in psychological association), as well as Attitudes and Knowledge regarding the EBPP, discussed below in order from the most to the least influential.

Utilization of EBT (i.e., Interventions/Methods With Proven Efficacy)

Utilization of Interventions/methods with proven efficacy was the strongest predictor of psychologists’ Belief that they implement EBPP, while not predicting the Intensity of EBPP elements implementation in practice. First, this finding may reflect the well-known confusion of EBPP and EBT revealed in previous studies (DiMeo et al., 2012; Newburg, 2020; Wilson et al., 2009). Second, we suppose that it may highlight that the EBT training programs may be seen as potentially contradictory to the EBPP approach generally, at least in Ukrainian educational curricula (e.g., by developing a psychologist’s impression that their interventions are already evidence-based enough as they utilize EBT). However, this point requires further research among Ukrainian psychologists.

Personal Therapy and Supervision

Unlike psychologists’ Belief that they implement EBPP, the strongest predictors for the Intensity of EBPP elements implementation were the Personal therapy of the psychologist and receiving Supervision. Although previous research suggests that an experience of personal therapy does not predict the effectiveness of psychologists’ practice (Moe & Thimm, 2021), it is seen as fundamental for professional training, identity development, and self-care of professionals (Norcross & VandenBos, 2018), including for learning EBTs (Orlinsky et al., 2005). Similarly, there is growing evidence of the contribution of supervision to EBPP training outcomes (Barrett et al., 2020; Borders et al., 2023). Therefore, we assume that Personal therapy and Supervision as a part of psychologists’ training may be seen as valuable contributors to further EBPP implementation in practice.

Positive Attitudes to EBPP Elements

Positive attitudes to EBPP elements also predicted the Intensity of EBPP elements implementation in our study. This finding aligns with previous research focused on the attitudes and implementation of EBPP. For instance, a recent review of 46 studies empirically examining factors associated with implementing science into practice revealed that most papers reported a strong influence of attitudes on it (Fishman et al., 2021). Data collected among Australian psychologists also showed that positive attitudes to EBPP influenced practice but were also moderated by gender and shorter work experience (Hamill & Wiener, 2018). In Portugal, research revealed that psychologists were more likely to use specific interventions when had a positive attitude toward them (Mendes-Santos et al., 2020). However, this result differs from previous findings from German-speaking countries where positive attitudes toward EBPP did not correspond to the higher implementation of its elements, e.g., reviewing evidence, associated with a lack of time (Frytz et al., 2022). Further research would benefit from investigating the specification of attitudes to EBPP elements regarding the appeal, requirements, openness, and divergence, as proposed by Aarons and colleagues (2010).

Membership in Psychological Associations

In our study, Membership in Psychological Associations significantly contributed to both outcomes — psychologists’ Belief that they implement EBPP and the Intensity of EBPP elements implementation. First, this finding could be seen in the light of the history of EBPP, which shows that professional psychological associations play a significant role in its dissemination and implementation in a specific country, including by officially formulated requirements for psychologists’ practice (e.g., APA, 2006; CPA, 2012). Second, research revealed that psychologists consider professional standards and publications on EBPP provided by professional institutions as supporters for EBPP implementation (Flegge, 2023). No less important is that In Ukraine, psychological associations currently contribute to EBPP promotion by offering EBT training and occasional brief advanced training regarding EBPP. It is important because considering the best available research, which is a part of EBPP, requires lifelong education of psychologists (Spring, 2007). This finding also highlights the potential benefits of engaging professional associations in Ukraine in EBPP promotion.

Perceived Level of Knowledge Regarding EBPP

The Perceived level of knowledge regarding EBPP slightly but significantly affected both outcomes assessed in this study. First, this finding may be associated with the specificity of this variable as it was based on psychologists’ self-assessment of their knowledge, and it should be recalled that, as previous research revealed, psychologists tend to assess their knowledge of EBPP higher than their colleagues’ (Middleton et al., 2020). However, even those assessed as skilled in scientific data analysis by independent observers were not necessarily able to use their knowledge during the very interventions (Jiménez-Pérez & Vargas-Contreras, 2020). Nevertheless, previous research suggests that education regarding EBPP results in increased knowledge and improved attitudes toward EBPP (Lim et al., 2012), while more intensive training models lead to the implementation of EBPP in a psychologist’s behavior (Frank et al., 2020). Future research should be focused on what exactly is known regarding EBPP among Ukrainian psychologists.

Other Findings

Interestingly, the Perceived quality of university education regarding EBPP did not predict the implementation of EBPP, while previous research reported that learning EBPP at universities significantly predicted the positive attitude toward EBPP (Nguyen-Thi et al., 2023). This finding requires further investigation, including the expertise of educational curricula at universities in Ukraine, i.e., whether they cover EBPP topics.

Finally, regarding the revealed moderate correlation between the studied outcomes and the difference in their prediction models, we suppose it reflects the previously found non-equivalence of knowing (as a cognitive aspect) and utilizing (as a behavioral aspect) the EBPP approach (Jiménez-Pérez & Vargas-Contreras, 2020). For educational purposes, it supports the idea of seeking an optimal balance between didactic training focused on the transition of knowledge of EBPP and competence training focused on skills development to implement EBPP elements (McHugh & Barlow, 2010).

Limitations

This study has several limitations associated with sample size and specifics. First, the sample size is rather small, which reflects a widespread problem in collecting data in wartime Ukraine (Pavlova et al., 2024), including among psychologists (Velykodna et al., 2023). Second, gender distribution reflects both the current difficulty of involving men in data collection due to wartime (Lushchak et al., 2024) and gender inequity in mental health positions (Velykodna et al., 2023). One variable (psychologists’ Belief that they implement EBPP) used a 5-point Likert scale, measuring by mistake, while other variables used a 7-point Likert scale, which complicated the comparison of β-values obtained in this study.

Conclusion

Overall, the present study showed that EBPP implementation in Ukraine is only partly associated with predictors extracted from a literature review from previous research, such as EBT utilization, personal therapy and supervision, positive attitudes regarding EBPP, membership in psychological associations, and perceived knowledge. Moreover, psychologists’ belief that they implement EBPP only moderately correlated with its utilization in practice, which highlights the gap between cognitive and behavioral aspects of EBPP utilization. While the perceived quality of university education did not predict the dependent variables, instead of the membership in professional associations, we believe that Ukraine-based mental health professionals would benefit from disseminating EBPP knowledge both through university education and within associations. However, further qualitative research involving Ukrainian psychologists is needed to address the gaps revealed in this study.

Funding

The authors declare that no funding has been received for this research.

Acknowledgments

The authors have no additional (i.e., non-financial) support to report.

Competing Interests

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Author Contributions

MV: Contributed to all aspects of project, including literature review, design, survey development, data collection, data analysis and drafting and finalisation of manuscript. GL: Contributed to research project, literature review, design, survey development, data collection, data analysis and drafting of manuscript. LK: Contributed to research project, literature review, design, survey development, data collection, data analysis and drafting of manuscript. IK: Contributed to research project, literature review, design, preparation, data collection, data analysis and drafting of manuscript. VD: Contributed to survey development, data preparation and data analysis. TP: Contributed to survey development and data collection.

Ethics Statement

This study followed the ethical standards for conducting and reporting studies involving human beings. The ethical approval for this study was obtained from Ukraine Sigmund Freud University Ethical Board on November 11, 2023 (Protocol No. 3). Consent was gathered online along with survey responses.

Data Availability

The data and Jamovi logs are available at the Open Science Framework repository at Velykodna and Deputatov (2024)

Supplementary Materials

Type of supplementary materialsAvailability/Access
Data
Data 3-in-1 dataset.Velykodna and Deputatov (2024)
Data sheet.Velykodna and Deputatov (2024)
Code
No code was supplied.—
Material
Translation into English.Velykodna and Deputatov (2024)
Study/Analysis preregistration
The study was not preregistered.—
Other
Codebook.Velykodna and Deputatov (2024)
Jamovi logs (1–5).Velykodna and Deputatov (2024)

References

  • Aarons, G. A., Glisson, C., Hoagwood, K., Kelleher, K., Landsverk, J., & Cafri, G. (2010). Psychometric properties and US National norms of the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale (EBPAS). Psychological Assessment, 22(2), 356-365. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019188

  • APA. (2006). APA Presidential Task Force on evidence-based practice: Evidence-based practice in psychology. American Psychologist, 61(4), 271-285. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.61.4.271

  • Barrett, J., Gonsalvez, C. J., & Shires, A. (2020). Evidence‐based practice within supervision during psychology practitioner training: A systematic review. Clinical Psychologist, 24(1), 3-17. https://doi.org/10.1111/cp.12196

  • Berg, H. (2019). Evidence-based practice in psychology fails to be tripartite: A conceptual critique of the scientocentrism in evidence-based practice in psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 2253. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02253

  • Berg, H. (2020). Virtue ethics and integration in evidence-based practice in psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 258. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00258

  • Borders, L. D., Dianna, J. A., & McKibben, W. B. (2023). Clinical supervisor training: A ten-year scoping review across counseling, psychology, and social work. Clinical Supervisor, 42(1), 164-212. https://doi.org/10.1080/07325223.2023.2188624

  • Boswell, J. F., & Schwartzman, C. M. (2024). What are the pathways and barriers to implementing evidence-based practice and practice-based evidence in psychotherapy? In F. T. L. Leong, J. L. Callahan, J. Zimmerman, M. J. Constantino & C. F. Eubanks (Eds.), APA handbook of psychotherapy: Evidence-based practice, practice-based evidence, and contextual participant-driven practice (pp. 287–303). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000354-019

  • Chaban, O. (2019). Is it possible to evaluate the effectiveness of psychotherapy? (2019). Psychosomatic Medicine and General Practice, 4(3), E0403-E04210. https://doi.org/10.26766/pmgp.v4i3.210

  • Collins, G. S., Reitsma, J. B., Altman, D. G., & Moons, K. G. (2015). Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): The TRIPOD statement. Circulation, 131(2), 211-219. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.014508

  • CPA. (2012). Evidence-based practice of psychological treatments: A Canadian perspective. Canadian Psychological Association.

  • DiMeo, M. A., Moore, G. K., & Lichtenstein, C. (2012). Relationship of evidence-based practice and treatments: A survey of community mental health providers. Journal of Community Psychology, 40(3), 341-357. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.20516

  • Fishman, J., Yang, C., & Mandell, D. (2021). Attitude theory and measurement in implementation science: A secondary review of empirical studies and opportunities for advancement. Implementation Science, 16, Article 87. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01153-9

  • Flegge, L. G. (2023). Examining facilitators and barriers to evidence‐based professional practice by mental health providers in schools. Psychology in the Schools, 60(3), 566-591. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22783

  • Frank, H. E., Becker‐Haimes, E. M., & Kendall, P. C. (2020). Therapist training in evidence‐based interventions for mental health: A systematic review of training approaches and outcomes. Clinical Psychology: A Publication of the Division of Clinical Psychology of the American Psychological Association, 27(3), Article e12330. https://doi.org/10.1111/cpsp.12330

  • Frytz, P., Amesberger, G., & Hödlmoser, K. (2022). Results of a survey on evidence-based sport psychology practice in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland. Zeitschrift für Sportpsychologie, 29(1), 13-18. https://doi.org/10.1026/1612-5010/a000343

  • Hamill, N. R., & Wiener, K. K. K. (2018). Attitudes of psychologists in Australia towards evidence‐based practice in psychology. Australian Psychologist, 53(6), 477-485. https://doi.org/10.1111/ap.12342

  • Hook, K., Kozishkurt, J., Kovalchuk, O., Goncharenko, E., Kodovbetskyi, V., Opanasenko, M., Kopytko, A., Girnyk, A., Kliuzko, K., Drainoni, M.-L., & Bogdanov, S. (2021). Evaluating context and interest in training in evidence-based mental health care: A qualitative investigation among healthcare providers in Kyiv, Ukraine. BMC Research Notes, 14, Article 373. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-021-05786-3

  • Jiménez-Pérez, A., & Vargas-Contreras, E. (2020). Transfer of learning for evidence-based practice in psychology. International Education Studies, 13(5), 72-79. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v13n5p72

  • Klymenko, I., Velykodna, M., Lazos, G., Karamushka, L., Deputatov, V., & Pysarenko, T. (2025). Self-evaluated knowledge of evidence-based practice in psychology among university students in wartime Ukraine: Prediction model development. European Journal of Psychology Open, 84(Suppl. 1), Article 545. https://doi.org/10.1024/2673-8627/a000085

  • Lazos, G., Velykodna, M., Karamushka, L., Pysarenko, T., Klymenko, I., & Deputatov, V. (2024). Evidence-based practice in psychology: Predictors of utilization among Ukrainian psychologists. International Journal of Psychology, 59(S1), 275-275. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.13176

  • Lilienfeld, S. O., Ritschel, L. A., Lynn, S. J., Cautin, R. L., & Latzman, R. D. (2013). Why many clinical psychologists are resistant to evidence-based practice: Root causes and constructive remedies. Clinical Psychology Review, 33(7), 883-900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2012.09.008

  • Lim, A., Nakamura, B. J., Higa-McMillan, C. K., Shimabukuro, S., & Slavin, L. (2012). Effects of workshop trainings on evidence-based practice knowledge and attitudes among youth community mental health providers. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 50(6), 397-406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2012.03.008

  • Lushchak, O., Velykodna, M., Bolman, S., Strilbytska, O., Berezovskyi, V., & Storey, K. B. (2024). Prevalence of stress, anxiety, and symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder among Ukrainians after the first year of Russia invasion: A nationwide cross-sectional study. Lancet Regional Health. Europe, 36, Article 100773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanepe.2023.100773

  • McHugh, R. K., & Barlow, D. H. (2010). The dissemination and implementation of evidence-based psychological treatments: A review of current efforts. American Psychologist, 65(2), 73-84. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018121

  • Melgarejo, M., Lind, T., Stadnick, N. A., Helm, J. L., & Locke, J. (2020). Strengthening capacity for implementation of evidence-based practices for autism in schools: The roles of implementation climate, school leadership, and fidelity. American Psychologist, 75(8), 1105-1115. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000649

  • Mendes-Santos, C., Weiderpass, E., Santana, R., & Andersson, G. (2020). Portuguese psychologists’ attitudes toward internet interventions: Exploratory cross-sectional study. JMIR Mental Health, 7(4), Article e16817. https://doi.org/10.2196/16817

  • Meyer, A. E., Reilly, E. E., Daniel, K. E., Hollon, S. D., Jensen-Doss, A., Mennin, D. S., Muroff, J., Schuler, T. A., White, B. A., & Teachman, B. A. (2020). Characterizing evidence-based practice and training resource barriers: A needs assessment. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 14(3), 200-208. https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000261

  • Middleton, J. C., Kalogeropoulos, C., & Drapeau, M. (2020). What is evidence-based practice? A survey of psychotherapy service providers and leaders in psychology about evidence-based practice in psychology. Canadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy, 54(1), 22-49. https://cjc-rcc.ucalgary.ca/article/view/61212

  • Ministry of Health of Ukraine. (2024). Approved Order of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine on December 13, 2023, No. 2118: List of psychotherapy methods with proven effectiveness (Registered in the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine on January 25, 2024, No. 129/41474). Government of Ukraine. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z0129-24#Text

  • Moe, F. D., & Thimm, J. (2021). Personal therapy and the personal therapist. Nordic Psychology, 73(1), 3-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/19012276.2020.1762713

  • Nelson, T. D., Steele, R. G., & Mize, J. A. (2006). Practitioner attitudes toward evidence-based practice: Themes and challenges. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 33, 398-409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-006-0044-4

  • Newburg, J. A. (2020). Doctoral psychology students’ attitudes toward evidenced-based practice [Master’s thesis, University of Northern Iowa]. UNI ScholarWorks. https://scholarworks.uni.edu/etd/1072

  • Nguyen-Thi, M.-T., Nguyen, V. H. A., Luu-Thi, H.-T., & Tran-Chi, V.-L. (2023). Perceptions of evidence-based practice among Vietnamese psychology students. Journal of Asian Scientific Research, 13(4), 168-177. https://doi.org/10.55493/5003.v13i4.4942

  • Norcross, J. C., & VandenBos, G. R. (2018). Leaving it at the office: A guide to psychotherapist self-care (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.

  • Orlinsky, D. E., Rønnestad, M. H., Willutzki, U., Wiseman, H., & Botermans, J. F. (2005). The prevalence and parameters of personal therapy in Europe and elsewhere. In J. D. Geller, J. C. Norcross & D. E. Orlinsky (Eds.), The psychotherapist’s own psychotherapy (pp. 177–191). Oxford University Press.

  • Ozili, P. K. (2023). The acceptable R-square in empirical modelling for social science research. Social research methodology and publishing results: A guide to non-native English speakers (pp. 134–143). IGI Global.

  • Palii, V., Velykodna, M., Pereira, M., McElvaney, R., Bernard, S., Klymchuk, V., Burlachuk, O., Lupis, A. A., Diatel, N., Ireland, J. L., McNeill, K., Scarlet, J. L., Jaramillo-Sierra, A. L., Khoury, B., Rocio Sánchez Munar, D., Hedlund, S. L., Flanagan, T., LeBlanc, J., Agudelo Velez, D. M., & Gómez-Maquet, Y. (2024). The experience of launching a psychological hotline across 21 countries to support Ukrainians in wartime. Mental Health and Social Inclusion, 28(4), 321-325. https://doi.org/10.1108/MHSI-04-2023-0040

  • Pavlova, I., Rogowska, A. M., & Zhang, S. X. (2024). Mental health and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic and after the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Journal of Community Health, 49, 173-182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-023-01273-x

  • Pfeiffer, E., Beer, R., Birgersson, A., Cabrera, N., Cohen, J. A., Deblinger, E., Garbade, M., Kirsch, V., Kostova, Z., Larsson, M., Mannarino, A., Moffitt, G., Onsjö, M., Ostensjo, T., Sachser, C., Vikgren, A., Weyler Mueller, H., & Klymchuk, V. (2023). Implementation of an evidence-based trauma-focused treatment for traumatised children and their families during the war in Ukraine: A project description. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 14(2), Article 2207422. https://doi.org/10.1080/20008066.2023.2207422

  • Shedler, J. (2018). Where is the evidence for “evidence-based” therapy? Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 41(2), 319-329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psc.2018.02.001

  • Seleznova, V., Pinchuk, I., Feldman, I., Virchenko, V., Wang, B., & Skokauskas, N. (2023). The battle for mental well-being in Ukraine: Mental health crisis and economic aspects of mental health services in wartime. International Journal of Mental Health Systems, 17, Article 28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-023-00598-3

  • Sochenko, T., & Gabińska, A. (2017). Effectiveness of PTSD treatments for military service members and veterans. Psychosomatic Medicine and General Practice, 2(4), Article e020473. https://doi.org/10.26766/pmgp.v2i4.73

  • Spring, B. (2007). Evidence‐based practice in clinical psychology: What it is, why it matters; what you need to know. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 63(7), 611-631. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.20373

  • Spring, B., & Neville, K. (2010). Evidence-based practice in clinical psychology. In D. H. Barlow (Ed.), Oxford handbook of clinical psychology (pp. 128–149). Oxford Academic.

  • Velykodna, M. (2023). Psychoanalysis and psychoanalytic psychotherapy as an evidence-based practice: A review of empirical data on the effectiveness of working with children and adolescents. Ukrainian Psychoanalytic Journal, 1(1), 66-68. https://doi.org/10.32782/upj/2023-1-11

  • Velykodna, M., & Deputatov, V. (2024). Evidence-based practice in psychology. Ukraine. 2023–2024 [OSF project page containing codebook, data, Jamovi logs, and translation]. Open Science Foundation. https://osf.io/4q2jm/overview

  • Velykodna, M., Gorbunova, V., Frankova, I., Deputatov, V., & Happell, B. (2023). Predictors of satisfaction and value of advanced training for mental health professionals in wartime Ukraine. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 44(11), 1096-1108. https://doi.org/10.1080/01612840.2023.2258217

  • Velykodna, M., Lazos, G., Karamushka, L., Deputatov, V., Klymenko, I., & Pysarenko, T. (2025). Knowledge and attitudes towards the evidence-based practice in psychology among university students and psychologists in Ukraine: A cohort study. European Journal of Psychology Open, 84(Suppl. 1), Article 125. https://doi.org/10.1024/2673-8627/a000085

  • Waltman, S. H., Landry, J. M., Pujol, L. A., & Moore, B. A. (2020). Delivering evidence-based practices via telepsychology: Illustrative case series from military treatment facilities. Professional Psychology, Research and Practice, 51(3), 205-213. https://doi.org/10.1037/pro0000275

  • Wilson, J. L., Armoutliev, E., Yakunina, E., & Werth, J. L., Jr. (2009). Practicing psychologists’ reflections on evidence-based practice in psychology. Professional Psychology, Research and Practice, 40(4), 403-409. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016247

Appendix

Table A1

Variables and Relevant Data Types

VariableScaleData type
AgeContinuousNumber
GenderNominalOptions: Male / Female
Current residence.NominalOptions: In Ukraine / Abroad
Academic degrees in Psychology (multiple choice).NominalOptions: Bachelor / Master / Doctoral Degree
Number of graduated universities.ContinuousNumber
Location of graduated universities.NominalOptions: In Ukraine / Abroad
Membership in any psychological association.NominalOptions: No / Yes, Ukrainian / Yes, foreign / Yes, international
Field of practice.NominalOptions: Education / Science / Mental Health / Social Work / Military / Law / Business / Private practice / Other
Work experience.ContinuousNumber
Quality of university education regarding EBPP.Ordinal7-point Likert scale from 1 (“Completely disagree”) to 7 (“Completely agree”)
Learned intervention / method / approach (if available).NominalOptions: 23 different methods: EMDR, mindfulness, RTM, art therapy + Other (narrative)
Does this intervention/method have proven efficacy?NominalOptions: I don’t know / I don’t use any method / No / Yes
Belief that a psychologist implements EBPP (To what extent do you implement the EBPP approach?).Ordinal5-point Likert scale from 1 (Not at all) to 5 (To a large extent) + additional option “I do not know” (0)
Did you ever have personal therapy experience?OrdinalOptions: no / less than 50 hours / more than 50 hours / more than 100 hours / more than 200 hours / more than 300 hours
Did you ever have supervision experience?
Intensity of implementing EBPP (Please, indicate how often you utilize the following activities).
• Updating knowledge about the possibilities and limits of using a particular method or intervention.Ordinal7-point Likert scale from 1 (“Less than once in five years”) to 7 (“Daily”)
• Updating knowledge about the peculiarities of working with certain issues, requests, and personality types.
• Analysis of own practical experience (e.g., through supervision and discussions with colleagues).
• Analysis of the practical experience of colleagues (e.g., through supervision, discussions with colleagues, and clinical ateliers).
• Taking into account the sociocultural characteristics of a particular client (and appropriate choice or modification of the approach, method, and technique).
• Taking into account the personal preferences of the client (and the appropriate choice or modification of the approach, method, and technique).
Perceived knowledge regarding EBPP.Ordinal7-point Likert scale from 1 (“Almost nothing”) to 7 (“Very well”)
Attitude toward EBPP (Please assess each item as important or not important in providing psychological practice).
• Updating knowledge about the possibilities and limits of using a particular method or intervention.Ordinal7-point Likert scale from 1 (“Not important at all”) to 7 (“Very important”)
• Updating knowledge about the peculiarities of working with certain issues, requests, and personality types.
• Analysis of own practical experience (e.g., through supervision and discussions with colleagues).
• Analysis of the practical experience of colleagues (e.g., through supervision, discussions with colleagues, and clinical ateliers).
• Taking into account the sociocultural characteristics of a particular client (and appropriate choice or modification of the approach, method, and technique).
• Taking into account the personal preferences of the client (and the appropriate choice or modification of the approach, method, and technique).