Explore the vast range of titles available.

Objectives The Penn Computerized Neurocognitive Battery ‐ Child Version (PennCNB‐cv) is presented as a brief tool that allows comprehensive and automated assessment of 5 factors (via 14 performance tasks): Executive Control, Episodic Memory, Complex Cognition, Social Cognition, and Sensorimotor Speed. The literature links (dys)functions in these areas with psycho(patho)logical constructs, but evidence is scarce among Spanish‐speaking youth. Therefore, this study aims to validate the PennCNB‐cv in a community sample of Spanish adolescents. Methods After a process of (back)translation and adaptation by bilingual researchers, the PennCNB‐cv was administered in 34 schools. The sample included 1506 students, ages 14–19, 44.28% were male. Preliminary treatment of the data included descriptive and correlational statistics. To provide evidence of structural validity, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were performed. Results Results from the exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis showed a four‐factor model (Complex Cognition, Executive Control, Episodic Memory, and Social Cognition) as the most appropriate. These findings provide compelling evidence in favor of the a priori theory that underpinned the development​ of the CNB. Conclusions The study of the psychometric properties showed that the Spanish version of the PennCNB‐cv, seems to be an adequate tool for assessing neurocognitive functioning during adolescence.

Background The Spanish National Health System (NHS) faces a significant shortage of clinical psychologists with only 5.58 per 100,000 inhabitants. This study aimed to estimate the required number of specialists and residents in Clinical Psychology to provide adequate psychological treatments to the population in the NHS. Methods A needs-based model was adapted to forecast the required total number of clinical psychologists and the annual increase in the positions of residents in Clinical Psychology (PIR). This model followed five steps: (1) obtaining Spanish prevalence rates for three broad mental disorder categories (depression, anxiety, and others or severe mental disorders) from the 2017 National Health Survey (ENSE); (2) multiplying the prevalence rates by the Spanish population aged ≥ 15 years; (3) defining the percentage of cases eligible for treatment under three predefined scenarios (protocolized, intermediate, and adjusted); (4) operationalizing the characteristics of the three treatment scenarios (session number and duration); and (5) calculating the total number of clinical psychologists and the annual increase required for PIR positions. Results Depending on the treatment scenario, the estimations show a need for clinical psychologists ranging from 1665 to 13,527 for treating depressive disorders, 1792–9799 for anxiety disorders, and 2074–8294 specifically for severe mental disorders. On the other hand, depending on the treatment scenario and the timeframe to achieve the estimated number of professionals (within 3, 5, 8, or 10 years), for example, to achieve those estimations of professionals within 3 years, and according to the adjusted treatment scenario, the Spanish health system should offer approximately 481 PIR positions yearly during 3 years. Conclusions A significant increase in the number of PIR positions is necessary to meet the growing demand for psychological treatment in the Spanish NHS. Investing in a mental-health workforce can lead to substantial health and economic benefits. This study provides valuable insights for workforce planning and highlights the importance of addressing the shortage of clinical psychologists in the NHS.

Durante los últimos años hemos asistido a la regulación del ejercicio sanitario de la Psicología. Nuevas figuras profesionales, como el Psicólogo General Sanitario, precipitan la confusión en competencias respecto a otras profesiones ya existentes en el ámbito, como el Psicólogo especialista en Psicología Clínica. Esta circunstancia ha motivado conflictos e incluso difusión de información distorsionada (o ruido) desde los sectores académico y colegial. El presente trabajo intenta realizar un análisis, libre de ruido, de las controversias actuales no resueltas que afectarán de forma inminente a la evolución de la Psicología Sanitaria. Entre ellas, los límites entre ambas profesiones, su articulación dentro del ámbito sanitario, la acreditación de nuevas especialidades sanitarias y la regulación del Grado en Psicología. Más allá del ruido generado desde intereses particulares, este trabajo pretende analizar las opciones, oportunidades y consecuencias de la toma de decisiones respecto a estas cuestiones aún inconclusas. Finalmente, se apuesta por el debate abierto y transparente entre todas las partes de la Psicología, como única solución a la encrucijada actual de la disciplina. Palabras clave: Psicología Clínica, Psicología General Sanitaria, controversia. Practice in health related issues in psychology has been increasingly regulated over the past few years in Spain. New professional profiles such as General Health Psychologist have caused confusion over skills and competences with other existing professionals such as Clinical Psychologists. This circumstance has sometimes caused conflicts among psychology professionals due to misinformation (noise) from academic and professional bodies (COP) over recent legal discussions. Our manuscript tries to carry out a noiseless analysis of the current unresolved controversies surrounding psychology in the health sector that would inevitably affect the development of psychology in this area in Spain. Issues such as the boundaries between both professions, their role and functions in the health sector, the accreditation of new health specialties and the regulation of the Psychology Degree arise. Leaving aside the noise generated by particular interests, this article tries to analyze the options, opportunities and consequences of decision making about these yet to be solved matters. Finally, we encourage all psychology sectors to engage in an open and transparent debate as the only way to achieve a real solution for the critical position of psychology in Spain. Key words: Clinical Psychology, General Health Psychology, controversy.

Durante los últimos años hemos asistido a la regulación del ejercicio sanitario de la Psicología. Nuevas figuras profesionales, como el Psicólogo General Sanitario, precipitan la confusión en competencias respecto a otras profesiones ya existentes en el ámbito, como el Psicólogo especialista en Psicología Clínica. Esta circunstancia ha motivado conflictos e incluso difusión de información distorsionada (o ruido) desde los sectores académico y colegial. El presente trabajo intenta realizar un análisis, libre de ruido, de las controversias actuales no resueltas que afectarán de forma inminente a la evolución de la Psicología Sanitaria. Entre ellas, los límites entre ambas profesiones, su articulación dentro del ámbito sanitario, la acreditación de nuevas especialidades sanitarias y la regulación del Grado en Psicología. Más allá del ruido generado desde intereses particulares, este trabajo pretende analizar las opciones, oportunidades y consecuencias de la toma de decisiones respecto a estas cuestiones aún inconclusas. Finalmente, se apuesta por el debate abierto y transparente entre todas las partes de la Psicología, como única solución a la encrucijada actual de la disciplina.