Showing posts with label Treatment Process Measures. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Treatment Process Measures. Show all posts

Sunday, 15 May 2022

Treatment Outcome Expectations Scale (TOES)

Treatment Outcome Expectations Scale (TOES)

(Bickman et al., 2010).

The TOES is an 8-item measure that assesses youth and caregiver expectations about the outcome of treatment. Each item is rated on a 3-point Likert scale ranging from one (“I do not expect this”) to three (“I do expect this”). If the total score is less than two (for youth) or 2.5 (for caregivers), the youth or caregiver is rated as having low treatment expectations.

The Aberrant Behaviour Checklist (ABC)

The Aberrant Behaviour Checklist (ABC)

[57] are a caregiver report checklist designed to assess maladaptive behaviours in people with developmental disabilities, from age 6 years upwards and the content derives from work with older individuals with intellectual impairments. It therefore only just overlaps with the target age group for the review. It has 58 items and is available in 40 languages. It was used in four observational studies [18, 20, 30, 45] in the review with children as young as 3 years.

Pediatric Emotional Distress Scale (PEDS)

 Pediatric Emotional Distress Scale (PEDS)

Saylor, Swenson, Reynolds, & Taylor, 1999

The PEDS is a 21-item parent-report measure designed to screen youths ages 2-10 for emotional distress following a traumatic event. The PEDS can be used as a screening tool (The National Child Traumatic Stress Network, 2012), and to monitor symptom changes over time (Saylor et al., 1999; Swenson, Brown, & Sheidow, 2003). The measure consists of three subscales: Anxious/Withdrawn, Fearful, and Acting Out. Samples items include, “Seems sad and withdrawn,” “Refuses to sleep alone,” and “Has temper tantrums.” All items are rated on a 4-point Likert scale from one (“Almost Never”) to four (“Very Often”). This measure can be administered in approximately ten minutes. The PEDS demonstrates acceptable test-retest reliability over a period of 6-8 weeks (r = .55-.61) and adequate internal consistency (α = .72-.85). The measure demonstrates concurrent validity with the Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory (ECBI; Eyberg & Ross, 1978) and discriminant validity between trauma- and non-trauma exposed youths. This measure can be obtained from (conway.saylor@citadel.edu).

Child PTSD Symptom Scale (CPSS)

Child PTSD Symptom Scale (CPSS)

(Foa, Johnson, Feeny, & Treadwell, 2001).

The CPSS is a 24-item self- or clinician-report measure assessing trauma symptoms in youths 8 to 18.

The CPSS can be used as a screening tool, a diagnostic tool (International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, 2013), and to monitor symptom changes over time (Adler Nevo & Manassis, 2011). The first part of the CPSS maps onto DSM-IV criteria for PTSD. Each item is rated on a 4-point Likert scale to rate symptom severity ranging from zero (“Not at all”) to three (“5 or more times per week/almost always”). The second part of the measure focuses on functional impairment. Each item is rated from zero (“Absent”) to one (“Present”). This measure can be administered in 20 minutes by clinician and 10 minutes as a self-report measure. The CPSS can be scored manually with the first part yielding a PTSD symptom score between 0-51, and three subscale scores (i.e., re-experience, avoidance, and arousal). The first part of the CPSS demonstrates good internal consistency (α = .89), and adequate test-retest reliability of PTSD symptom severity scores over a period of one to two weeks (r = .63-.85). In addition, the CPSS demonstrates convergent validity (Foa et al., 2001) with the Child Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Reaction Index (CPTSD–RI; Fredrick, Pynoos, & Nader, 1992) and divergent validity when compared to the DSRSC (Birleson et al., 1987) and Multidimensional Anxiety Symptom Scale (MASC; March, Parker, Sullivan, Stallings, & Conners, 1997) scores. The second part of the CPSS (functional impairment) demonstrates good internal consistency (α = .89), adequate test-retest reliability over a period of one to two weeks (r = .70) as well as a strong relationship to overall PTSD severity as compared to the CPTSD-RI (r = .42; Foa et al., 2001).

This measure can be obtained from (foa@mail.med.upenn.edu).

Youth Top Problems

Youth Top Problems

(TP; Weisz et al., 2011).

The TP is an idiographic assessment measure designed to identify important problems related to functioning and symptoms (e.g., “My mom and I argue a lot”) at the beginning of treatment, and track the severity of these problems over the course of treatment. Thus, it is best described as a treatment monitoring and evaluation tool. At the beginning of treatment, the caregiver and youth work with their clinician to identify all problems of concern. After getting a complete list of the problems, the clinician and family rate each listed problem in terms of “how big a problem it is for the youth/caregiver” from one (“Not at all”) to 10 (“Very, very much”). After creating this comprehensive list with associated severity ratings, the caregiver and youth identify “Which problem is the biggest problem right now? Which of these is giving you [or youth’s name] the most trouble right now? Which one is the most important to work on?” (Weisz et al., 2011). The top three problems become the TP measure that is used throughout treatment. Each week, the caregiver and youth re-rate these top three problems on the same one to ten scales. To assess psychometric properties, the TP was coded and compared to the CBCL (Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001) and the YSR (Achenbach, 1991b) scores throughout treatment. Speaking to this measure’s relevancy to clinical work, 95.7% of the caregiver-identified problems and 97.9% of the youth-identified problems matched a CBCL item or YSR item, respectively (Weisz et al., 2011). The TP demonstrates adequate test-retest reliability over a period of one week (α= .69 to .91; Weisz et al., 2011). This measure is sensitive to change over time (Weisz et al., 2011). Since this is an idiographic measure, a form is not available per se, but clinicians are welcome to follow the procedure outlined about to create their own version for clients.  

Trauma

Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ)

 Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ)

Goodman, 1997

The SDQ is a 25-item parent-, and teacher- and a self-report measure designed as a behavioral screening questionnaire for youths ages 3-16. The SDQ can be used as a screening tool (Center for School Mental Health, 2012), and to monitor symptom changes over time (Mathai, Anderson, & Bourne, 2003). The items comprise five subscales: emotional symptoms, conduct problems, hyperactivity/inattention, peer relationship problems, and pro-social behavior. The SDQ can be administered in approximately five minutes. In addition to this 25-item version, there are two supplements that can be administered. The first is the “Impact” supplement. This asks the respondent about the chronicity, distress, social impairment, and burden to others that are a result of the youth’s problem(s) (Goodman et al., 2012). The second supplement, “Follow-up questions,” contains two questions related to services received. The questions are: “Has the intervention reduced problems?” and “Has the intervention helped in other ways (e.g. making the problems more bearable)?”  The SDQ demonstrates adequate internal consistency (α = .73; Goodman, 2001) and excellent concurrent validity with the CBCL (Achenbach, 1991a).

The measure is available online (Download SDQ).

Pediatric Symptom Checklist and Pediatric Symptom Checklist-Youth Report (PSC & Y-PSC)

Pediatric Symptom Checklist and Pediatric Symptom Checklist-Youth Report (PSC & Y-PSC)

(Jellinek et al.1988).

The PSC/Y-PSC is a 35-item parent- and a self-report measure designed to screen for youth showing problems in general psychosocial functioning. This PSC and Y-PSC can be used as screening tools (MassHealth, 2013), and to monitor symptom changes over time (Murphy et al., 2012). The PSC parent-report can be by parents of youth ages 4-16, while the Y-PSC self-report can be used by youth ages 11-18 (MassHealth, 2013). The measure consists of three subscales: Attention Problems, Internalizing Problems and Externalizing Problems. Sample items include “Feels he or she is bad,” “Acts younger than children his or her age,” and “Distracted easily.” Each item is rated on a 3-point scale from zero (“Never”) to two (“Often”).  For youths ages 6-18, the cutoff score is 28 whereas, in youths aged three to five, the cutoff score is 24. The PSC demonstrates the specificity of .68 and sensitivity of .95 (Jellinek et al., 1988). 

The measure demonstrates adequate test-retest reliability over a period of four weeks (r = .84-91) and excellent internal consistency (α =.91; Murphy & Jellinek, 1988). Both measures are available online.

Download PSC & Y-PSC

Session Report Form (SRF)

Session Report Form (SRF)

Bickman et al., 2010

The SRF is a 25-item measure to be completed by the therapist at the end of each session. The SRF covers topics such as session characteristics (e.g., length of session), topics associated with other PTPB measures (e.g., family issues), and treatment processes (e.g., therapeutic alliance; Bickman et al., 2010). This measure was created to be linked with all the other PTPB measures and provides information that can be used for clinical supervision and treatment decision-making (Bickman et al., 2010).


More information about the individual measures, including detailed psychometric information, can be found in the 2012 special issue of Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research (Bickman & Athay 2012) and the PTPB treatment manual. These measures are available online (http://peabody.vanderbilt.edu/research/center-evaluation-program-improvement-cepi/reg/ptpb_2nd_ed_downloads.php).

Motivation for Youth’s Treatment Scale (MYTS)

Motivation for Youth’s Treatment Scale (MYTS)

Bickman et al., 2010).

The MYTS focuses on the youth’s intrinsic treatment motivation. Responses are scored on a 5-point Likert Scale from one (“Strongly Disagree”) to five (“Strongly Agree”). A total score greater than 3.5 on the youth version is associated with high motivation for counselling whereas, on the caregiver version, a total score greater than 4.38 is associated with high caregiver motivation for counselling (Bickman et al., 2010)

Youth Counseling Impact Scale (YCIS)

Youth Counseling Impact Scale (YCIS)

Bickman et al., 2010

The YCIS is a 6-item self-report measure that focuses on the youth’s perception of the positive impact that is/he thinks treatment has had in terms of insight into problems and solutions, and behavioral, cognitive, and emotional changes made following the previous session (Bickman et al., 2010). We rate each item on a 5-point Likert scale with scores ranging from one (“Not at all a Problem”) to five (“Totally”). Youth who rate therapy impact as high believe that their counselling sessions have made a positive impact in terms of the way they view themselves, their problems, and how they behave (Bickman et al., 2010).

Therapeutic Alliance Quality Scale

Therapeutic Alliance Quality Scale (TAQS/TAQR)

(Bickman et al., 2010).

The TAQS is a 5-item measure designed to assess a youth’s experience of the therapeutic alliance during one session with their therapist. We rate the measure on a 5-point Likert scale from one (“Not at all”) to five (“Totally”).  If a score on the TAQS falls below 3.80, the therapeutic Alliance is considered low by the youth. The TAQR is a 6-item measure intended to be used with the TAQS by both the therapist and caregiver. Two caregiver items ask about the caregiver’s general feelings about their working alliance with their therapist. Four therapist items ask the therapist to check how accurately they know the youth and caregiver’s perception of the therapeutic alliance and see how well these assessments line up with the therapist’s own perception of the therapeutic alliance. We rate the TAQR on a 5-point Likert scale from one (“Not at all”) to five (“Totally”).

Featured Post

ICD-11 Criteria for Gambling Disorder (6C50)

ICD-11 Criteria for Gambling Disorder (6C50) A collection of dice Foundation URI : http://id.who.int/icd/entity/1041487064 6C50 Gambling d...