Practitioners have claimed that information relevant to psychotherapy application is not regularly provided in professional journals. A survey of the 1985-1987 psychotherapy outcome literature investigated the extent of specific points of information in journal reports. Results partially support the complaint that pertinent information is not routinely available. No content area addressed found consistent representation. Noticeable deficiencies were tabulated for specific categories of patient demographics, disorder description, and replication studies. This suggests an underacknowledgement of the practical utility, both clinical and empirical, of common points of fact.