What counts? : a Delphi consensus-based approach to interpreting accreditation standards for direct client activities in clinical psychology and clinical neuropsychology programs

Objective: Despite operating from the same professional accreditation standards, discrepancies in what is recorded as Direct Client Activities (DCA) in postgraduate psychology trainee logbooks have been noted across training programs in Australia. The aim of this study was to create a consensus-based list of DCA to guide the completion of trainee logbooks while undertaking practicums in clinical psychology or clinical neuropsychology. Method: A modified Delphi approach was used to gather data across three rounds. Two expert panels, representing the two areas of practice endorsement (AoPEs), rated the degree to which they agreed or disagreed with a range of activities being recorded as DCA in trainee logbooks. Activities with over 80% agreement or disagreement during any round were accepted or rejected from the final list, respectively. Results: Sixteen activities for clinical psychology and 30 activities for clinical neuropsychology were endorsed by the expert panels. Only nine activities across the two panels did not reach consensus over the three rounds. Conclusions: This study has created a list of consensus activities within these two AoPEs which will facilitate benchmarking activities, and reduce confusion and anxiety for trainees, super-visors, and placement coordinators. Discrepancies do, however, remain across the AoPEs, warranting further clarification and definition refinement.