Meta-Analysis of Treatment for Child Sexual Behavior Problems: Practice Elements and Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This meta-analysis of 11 treatment outcome studies evaluated 18 specific treatments of sexual behavior problems (SBP) as a primary or secondary target. Specifically, it examines relations among child characteristics, treatment characteristics (including practice elements), and short-term outcome (including sexual and general behavior problems). Utilizing pre- and postintervention results, the overall degree of change over the course of treatment was estimated at a 0.46 and 0.49 standard deviation decline in SBP and general behavior problems, respectively. As hypothesized, the caregiver practice element Parenting/Behavior Management Skills (BPT) predicted the Child Sexual Behavior Inventory (and the Child Behavior Checklist when BPT was combined with caregiver Rules about Sexual Behaviors). In contrast, practice elements that evolved from Adult Sex Offender (ASO) treatments were not significant predictors. BPT and preschool age group provided the best model fit and more strongly predicted outcome than broad treatment type classifications (e.g., Play Therapy or Cognitive Behavior Therapy). Results question current treatments for children with SBP that are based on ASO models of treatment without caregiver involvement.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.032 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".