Person:

Weisz, John

The Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale—Parent Version (RCADS-P) is a 47-item parent-report questionnaire of youth anxiety and depression, with scales corresponding to the DSM-IV categories of Separation Anxiety Disorder, Social Phobia, Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD), Panic Disorder, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, and Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). The RCADS-P is currently the only parent-report questionnaire that concurrently assesses youth symptomatology of individual anxiety disorders as well as depression in accordance with DSM-IV nosology. The present study examined the psychometric properties of the RCADS-P in a large (N = 490), clinic-referred sample of youths. The RCADS-P demonstrated favorable psychometric properties, including high internal consistency, convergent/divergent validity, as well as strong discriminant validity—evidencing an ability to discriminate between anxiety and depressive disorders, as well as between the targeted anxiety disorders. Support for the DSM-related six-factor RCADS-P structure was also evidenced. This structure demonstrated superior fit to a recently suggested alternative to the DSM-IV classification of anxiety and affective disorders—namely, the MDD/GAD “distress” factor.

Most everyday child and adolescent psychotherapy does not follow manuals that document the procedures. Consequently, usual clinical care has remained poorly understood and rarely studied. The Therapy Process Observational Coding System for Child Psychotherapy–Strategies scale (TPOCS–S) is an observational measure of youth psychotherapy procedures designed to support the study of usual clinical care by providing a means of characterizing it. Coders independently rated usual care therapy sessions conducted with 43 children (aged 8–15 years) diagnosed with anxiety and depressive disorders. The TPOCS–S showed good interrater reliability, its 5 subscales (e.g., Behavioral, Cognitive, Psychodynamic, Client-Centered, Family) showed good internal consistency, and analyses supported TPOCS–S validity.

Improving outcomes for children and adolescents with mental health needs demands a broad meta-systemic orientation to overcome persistent problems in current service systems. Improving outcomes necessitates inclusion of current and emerging evidence about effective practices for the diverse population of youth and their families. Key components of the meta-system for children with emotional or behavioral needs include families, cultural norms and values, and service sectors such as schools, pediatric health centers, specialty mental health systems, juvenile justice systems, child protection services, and substance use treatment systems. We describe each component of the meta-system, noting challenges to the provision of evidence-based practice (EBP) and highlighting ways to optimize outcomes. Our focus is on the inclusion of evidence-based assessment and interventions, including prevention, within a developmentally driven and culturally responsive contextual model. Recommendations for addressing disparities in research funding and essential steps to foster communication and coordination of EBP across settings are provided.

Objective: Most tests of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for youth anxiety disorders have shown beneficial effects, but these have been efficacy trials with recruited youths treated by researcher-employed therapists. One previous (nonrandomized) trial in community clinics found that CBT did not outperform usual care (UC). The present study used a more stringent effectiveness design to test CBT versus UC in youths referred to community clinics, with all treatment provided by therapists employed in the clinics. Method: A randomized controlled trial methodology was used. Therapists were randomized to training and supervision in the Coping Cat CBT program or UC. Forty-eight youths (56% girls, 8 to 15 years of age, 38% Caucasian, 33% Latino, 15% African-American) diagnosed with DSM-IV anxiety disorders were randomized to CBT or UC. Results: At the end of treatment more than half the youths no longer met criteria for their primary anxiety disorder, but the groups did not differ significantly on symptom (e.g., parent report, eta-square = 0.0001; child report, eta-square = 0.09; both differences favoring UC) or diagnostic (CBT, 66.7% without primary diagnosis; UC, 73.7%; odds ratio 0.71) outcomes. No differences were found with regard to outcomes of comorbid conditions, treatment duration, or costs. However, youths receiving CBT used fewer additional services than UC youths (χ21 = 8.82, p = .006). Conclusions: CBT did not produce better clinical outcomes than usual community clinic care. This initial test involved a relatively modest sample size; more research is needed to clarify whether there are conditions under which CBT can produce better clinical outcomes than usual clinical care.

Objective: To support ongoing monitoring of child response during treatment, we sought to develop a brief, easily administered, clinically relevant, and psychometrically sound measure. Method: We first developed child and caregiver forms of a 12-item Brief Problem Checklist (BPC) interview by applying item response theory and factor analysis to Youth Self-Report (YSR; Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001) and Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL;Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001) data for a sample of 2,332 youths. These interviews were then administered weekly via telephone to an ethnically diverse clinical sample of 184 boys and girls 7–13 years of age and their caregivers participating in outpatient treatment, to examine psychometric properties and feasibility. Results: Internal consistency and test–retest reliability were excellent, and factor analysis yielded 1 internalizing and 1 externalizing factor. Validity tests showed large and significant correlations with corresponding scales on paper-and-pencil administrations of the CBCL and YSR as well as with diagnoses obtained from a structured diagnostic interview. Discriminant validity of the BPC interviews was supported by low correlations with divergent criteria. Longitudinal data for the initial 6 months of treatment demonstrated that the BPC significantly predicted change on related measures of child symptoms. Estimates obtained from random coefficient growth models showed generally higher slope reliabilities for the BPC given weekly relative to the CBCL and YSR given every 3 months. Conclusions: Given their combination of brevity and psychometric strength, the child and caregiver BPC interviews appear to be a promising strategy for efficient, ongoing assessment of clinical progress during the course of treatment.

Extensive research has linked youth depression symptoms to low levels of perceived control, using measures that reflect primary control (i.e., influencing objective conditions to make them fit one’s wishes). We hypothesized that depressive symptoms are also linked to low levels of secondary control (i.e., influencing the psychological impact of objective conditions by adjusting oneself to fit them). To test the hypothesis, we developed the Secondary Control Scale for Children (SCSC), examined its psychometrics, and used it to assess the secondary control-depression symptomatology association. In a large adolescent sample, the SCSC showed factorial integrity, internal consistency, test-retest stability, convergent and discriminant validity, and accounted for more than 40% of the variance in depression symptoms. Consistent with evidence on risk and gender, depression symptoms were more strongly associated with secondary control in girls and primary control in boys. Assessing secondary control may help us understand youth depression vulnerability in girls and boys.

The Youth Self Report (YSR) is a widely used measure of youth emotional and behavioral problems. Although the YSR was designed for youths ages 11 to 18, no studies have systematically evaluated whether youths younger than age 11 can make valid reports on this measure. This study thus examined the reliability and validity of the YSR scales scores for younger (ages 7–10; n = 184) and older (ages 11–14; n = 147) youths. Results demonstrated that younger youths were able to provide reliable reports on the YSR broad band (Internalizing, Externalizing) scales, though less so on the narrow band scales. Across all scales, the externalizing scales performed more favorably than the internalizing scales among both younger and older youth. Younger youths’ DSM-oriented scales corresponded significantly with DSM diagnoses.

Objective: Some critics of treatment manuals have argued that their use may undermine the quality of the client–therapist alliance. This notion was tested in the context of youth psychotherapy delivered by therapists in community clinics. Method: Seventy-six clinically referred youths (57% female, age 8–15 years, 34% Caucasian) were randomly assigned to receive nonmanualized usual care or manual-guided treatment to address anxiety or depressive disorders. Treatment was provided in community clinics by clinic therapists randomly assigned to treatment condition. Youth–therapist alliance was measured with the Therapy Process Observational Coding System—Alliance (TPOCS–A) scale at 4 points throughout treatment and with the youth report Therapeutic Alliance Scale for Children (TASC) at the end of treatment. Results: Youths who received manual-guided treatment had significantly higher observer-rated alliance than usual care youths early in treatment; the 2 groups converged over time, and mean observer-rated alliance did not differ by condition. Similarly, the manual-guided and usual care groups did not differ on youth report of alliance. Conclusions: Our findings did not support the contention that using manuals to guide treatment harms the youth–therapist alliance. In fact, use of manuals was related to a stronger alliance in the early phase of treatment.

Background: Evidence-based treatments for child mental health problems are not consistently available in public mental health settings. Expanding availability requires workforce training. However, research has demonstrated that training alone is not sufficient for changing provider behavior, suggesting that ongoing intervention-specific supervision or consultation is required. Supervision is notably under-investigated, particularly as provided in public mental health. The degree to which supervision in this setting includes ‘gold standard’ supervision elements from efficacy trials (e.g., session review, model fidelity, outcome monitoring, skill-building) is unknown. The current federally-funded investigation leverages the Washington State Trauma-focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Initiative to describe usual supervision practices and test the impact of systematic implementation of gold standard supervision strategies on treatment fidelity and clinical outcomes. Methods/Design The study has two phases. We will conduct an initial descriptive study (Phase I) of supervision practices within public mental health in Washington State followed by a randomized controlled trial of gold standard supervision strategies (Phase II), with randomization at the clinician level (i.e., supervisors provide both conditions). Study participants will be 35 supervisors and 130 clinicians in community mental health centers. We will enroll one child per clinician in Phase I (N = 130) and three children per clinician in Phase II (N = 390). We use a multi-level mixed within- and between-subjects longitudinal design. Audio recordings of supervision and therapy sessions will be collected and coded throughout both phases. Child outcome data will be collected at the beginning of treatment and at three and six months into treatment. Discussion This study will provide insight into how supervisors can optimally support clinicians delivering evidence-based treatments. Phase I will provide descriptive information, currently unavailable in the literature, about commonly used supervision strategies in community mental health. The Phase II randomized controlled trial of gold standard supervision strategies is, to our knowledge, the first experimental study of gold standard supervision strategies in community mental health and will yield needed information about how to leverage supervision to improve clinician fidelity and client outcomes. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01800266

Objective: To complement standardized measurement of symptoms, we developed and tested an efficient strategy for identifying (before treatment) and repeatedly assessing (during treatment) the problems identified as most important by caregivers and youths in psychotherapy. Method: A total of 178 outpatient-referred youths, 7–13 years of age, and their caregivers separately identified the 3 problems of greatest concern to them at pretreatment and then rated the severity of those problems weekly during treatment. The Top Problems measure thus formed was evaluated for (a) whether it added to the information obtained through empirically derived standardized measures (e.g., the Child Behavior Checklist [CBCL; Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001] and the Youth Self-Report [YSR; Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001]) and (b) whether it met conventional psychometric standards. Results: The problems identified were significant and clinically relevant; most matched CBCL/YSR items while adding specificity. The top problems also complemented the information yield of the CBCL/YSR; for example, for 41% of caregivers and 79% of youths, the identified top problems did not correspond to any items of any narrowband scales in the clinical range. Evidence on test–retest reliability, convergent and discriminant validity, sensitivity to change, slope reliability, and the association of Top Problems slopes with standardized measure slopes supported the psychometric strength of the measure. Conclusions: The Top Problems measure appears to be a psychometrically sound, client-guided approach that complements empirically derived standardized assessment; the approach can help focus attention and treatment planning on the problems that youths and caregivers consider most important and can generate evidence on trajectories of change in those problems during treatment.