This presentation introduces non-invasive neuromodulation in clear, practical language and explains why it is becoming an important part of contemporary mental health care in Australia. Around 1/3 people experiencing depression do not respond adequately to medication or psychotherapy alone, while access to psychiatric services is often limited by long waiting times and workforce shortages. Antidepressants are widely overprescribed, with many individuals experiencing withdrawal and discontinuation effects. In this setting, psychologists frequently support clients for whom standard approaches are insufficient. With appropriate training and governance, psychologists can deliver neuromodulation and integrate it into assessment, formulation, and treatment planning.

Although non-invasive brain stimulation treatments have existed for decades, recent years have brought a shift toward more precise, better tolerated and increasingly individualised methods grounded in neuroscience and clinical research. Contemporary electroconvulsive therapy remains the most effective stimulation treatment for severe and treatment-resistant depression, yet its hospital-based and resource-intensive nature can restrict accessibility. These limitations have encouraged development of non-invasive approaches designed to improve access, tolerability and continuity of care.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is the most established non-invasive brain stimulation treatment in mental health services. It has strong evidence for major depressive disorder, receives Medicare funding in Australia, and is delivered within multidisciplinary teams under psychiatric oversight. The presentation outlines how rTMS works, who it suits, and why it is relevant for individuals who have not benefited from medication or psychotherapy alone.

The session also introduces transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a lower-intensity, portable and comparatively low-cost intervention with Therapeutic Goods Administration approval and a growing evidence base for depression. Research shows clinically meaningful benefits, particularly in mild to moderate presentations and as an adjunct to psychotherapy. Its flexibility and tolerability make it suitable for maintenance following rTMS or therapy, longer-term management, and use in rural or regional areas or for people unable to travel due to illness or anxiety.

Common misconceptions are addressed, including beliefs that brain stimulation is inherently painful or cognitively harmful, misunderstandings about modern electroconvulsive therapy, and confusion between clinically governed neuromodulation and unregulated commercial devices. A central focus is the distinctive contribution of psychologists, whose expertise in assessment, diagnosis, formulation and evidence-based therapy positions them to integrate neuromodulation into coherent care while liaising with medical practitioners as required. Attendees leave with a clear understanding of how non-invasive neuromodulation can be applied thoughtfully, ethically and safely within modern Australian psychological practice.

Psychological assessment reports are high-stakes clinical documents. They shape diagnostic understanding, guide intervention planning, inform educational and medical decision-making, and influence how families understand their child. Despite this, while routine outcome monitoring is now standard in many therapeutic contexts, systematic feedback on the usefulness and impact of psychological reports remains uncommon in assessment practice.

This presentation introduces the concept of reflexive assessment practice: a structured, continuous quality improvement approach to monitoring the clarity, usefulness, and functional impact of psychological reports. Drawing on contemporary literature from neuropsychology, psychoeducational assessment, and healthcare audit research, the session will synthesise current evidence regarding (1) measures that can be used to evaluate report quality, including readability metrics, stakeholder-rated usefulness, and implementation of recommendations; and (2) practical models for implementing audit and feedback cycles within clinical services.

Research examining stakeholder perspectives (e.g., parents, referrers, educators) highlights that report utility extends beyond technical accuracy to include clarity, actionability, and emotional validation. Audit and feedback literature further demonstrates that structured monitoring, benchmarked standards, and re-audit cycles are associated with improvements in professional practice across healthcare settings. However, such approaches are rarely embedded systematically within psychological assessment services.

The final component of the presentation will introduce a practical, scalable implementation model that participants can adapt to private practice, multidisciplinary clinics, or public services. This model integrates objective indicators (e.g., readability indices), brief parent/client feedback tools, and scheduled review cycles to create a sustainable feedback loop. Emphasis will be placed on low-burden implementation strategies, ethical considerations, and fostering a culture of growth rather than compliance.

By reframing report writing as a process open to evaluation and refinement, reflexive assessment practice supports professional accountability, strengthens interprofessional collaboration, and enhances the lived usefulness of psychological reports for families and referrers. Participants will leave with a clear framework for embedding continuous quality improvement into their own assessment workflows.

The new Psychology Board Code of Conduct includes explicit standards related to cultural responsivity, and reflexivity in psychology practice (AHPRA, 2024). The Australian Psychology Accreditation Council also specify that “cultural responsiveness, reflection and reflexivity are appropriately integrated within
the program and clearly articulated as a learning outcome” (APAC, 2025). Thus, these two ideas—cultural responsivity and reflexivity—are relatively new, but key skills developed within psychology degrees, and demonstrated by practising psychologists. In America, there is evidence that training of psychologists has generally improved regarding training for diversity, didactic approaches to cultural responsivity, and supervised clinical practice with diverse populations. However, the same evidence suggests that students are still lacking in experiential activities and cultural immersion, and have limited opportunities to reflect upon personal biases (see Benuto et al., 2019 for review). It is commonly accepted Australian psychology programs share similar limitations (i.e., limited specific culturally-responsive training; program content designed around the dominant culture; see the 2017 Apology by the Australian Psychological Society which explicitly references historical exclusion of “cultural belief systems and world views”).

In the face of these limitations and new mandates to embed these skills into psychology curriculums, we considered the importance of being able to explicitly evaluate these skills within students. Further, we wanted to evaluate the ways in which our postgraduate psychology programs, in particular, teach and assess for cultural responsivity and reflexivity. Here, we developed a set of materials (incorporating some pre-existing measures), to assess cultural responsivity and reflexivity in post-graduate psychology students at Flinders University. We used a mixed-methods approach to assess students’ cultural responsivity and reflexivity pre- and post- their first semester in their first year of postgraduate study. We discuss findings and implications of the assessment tools we used, their calibration to similar constructs, and outcomes of students' learning over time.