Youth mental health (MH) treatment research has provided substantial support for the efficacy of several psychosocial treatments for the most common youth MH problems: (a) anxiety, (b) depression, and (c) disruptive behavior disorders. However, the few existing studies of the effectiveness of youth MH treatment in usual clinical practice settings have provided discouraging results, with average treatment effects near zero. This wide gap between the outcomes of psychosocial treatment in clinical trials research versus usual clinical practice represents a significant public health concern because the vast majority of the 12-17% of U.S. children and adolescents who receive some form of MH treatment each year are seen in usual practice settings, not clinical trials. As such, several research policy directives have called for research to determine the extent to which usual clinical practice is consistent with the scientific evidence-base. The proposed study will address this pubic health need by characterizing the most common treatment strategies used by youth MH providers. Using a national survey of youth MH providers across five major mental health disciplines (psychiatry, psychology, social work, marriage and family therapy, and counseling), we will determine the extent to which everyday clinical practice reflects the best scientific evidence about effective psychosocial treatment strategies for youths with problems in one or more of these three areas: anxiety, depression, disruptive behavior. We will also examine organizational, provider and child/family factors that may influence practice. The study will proceed in two phases. In phase I, we will develop, pilot and refine the survey measure. In phase II, we will send the survey to a randomly selected, representative sample of 5000 youth MH providers across the five disciplines listed above. Abstract Youth mental health (MH) treatment research has provided substantial support for the efficacy of several psychosocial treatments for the most common youth MH problems: (a) anxiety, (b) depression, and (c) disruptive behavior disorders. However, the few existing studies of the effectiveness of youth MH treatment in usual clinical practice settings have provided discouraging results, with average treatment effects near zero. This wide gap between the outcomes of psychosocial treatment in clinical trials research versus usual clinical practice represents a significant public health concern because the vast majority of the 12-17% of U.S. children and adolescents who receive some form of MH treatment each year are seen in usual practice settings, not clinical trials. As such, several research policy directives have called for research to determine the extent to which usual clinical practice is consistent with the scientific evidence-base. The proposed study will address this pubic health need by characterizing the most common treatment strategies used by youth MH providers. Using a national survey of youth MH providers across five major mental health disciplines (psychiatry, psychology, social work, marriage and family therapy, and counseling), we will determine the extent to which everyday clinical practice reflects the best scientific evidence about effective psychosocial treatment strategies for youths with problems in one or more of these three areas: anxiety, depression, disruptive behavior. We will also examine organizational, provider and child/family factors that may influence practice. The study will proceed in two phases. In phase I, we will develop, pilot and refine the survey measure. In phase II, we will send the survey to a randomly selected, representative sample of 5000 youth MH providers across the five disciplines listed above. ? ? ?
| Cook, Jonathan R; Hausman, Estee M; Jensen-Doss, Amanda et al. (2017) Assessment Practices of Child Clinicians. Assessment 24:210-221 |
| Kearns, Marcia A; Hawley, Kristin M (2014) Predictors of polypharmacy and off-label prescribing of psychotropic medications: a national survey of child and adolescent psychiatrists. J Psychiatr Pract 20:438-47 |
| Jensen-Doss, Amanda; Hawley, Kristin M (2011) Understanding clinicians' diagnostic practices: attitudes toward the utility of diagnosis and standardized diagnostic tools. Adm Policy Ment Health 38:476-85 |
| Jensen-Doss, Amanda; Hawley, Kristin M (2010) Understanding barriers to evidence-based assessment: clinician attitudes toward standardized assessment tools. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol 39:885-96 |
| Hawley, Kristin M; Cook, Jonathan R; Jensen-Doss, Amanda (2009) Do noncontingent incentives increase survey response rates among mental health providers? A randomized trial comparison. Adm Policy Ment Health 36:343-8 |
