A commentary on Duan et al.: RNR’s luster remains

Duan et al. (2024) published a meta-analysis in this journal claiming that the risk-need-responsivity principles are not “golden”.

We challenge their conclusion by pointing out some major errors in their literature search and classification of studies.

Central to our argument is that Duan and his colleagues incorrectly identified a significant number of RNR studies as non-RNR. Consequently, their results led to an incorrect conclusion.

Our re-analysis of their data finds that the RNR principles remain highly relevant to the rehabilitation field.