In-session caregiver behavior predicts symptom change in youth receiving trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy (TF-CBT).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Involving caregivers in trauma-focused treatments for youth has been shown to result in better outcomes, but it is not clear which in-session caregiver behaviors enhance or inhibit this effect. The current study examined the associations between caregiver behaviors during Trauma-Focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (TF-CBT) and youth cognitive processes and symptoms. METHOD: Participants were a racially diverse sample of Medicaid-eligible youth (ages 7-17) and their nonoffending caregivers (N = 71 pairs) who received TF-CBT through an effectiveness study in a community setting. Caregiver and youth processes were coded from audio-recorded sessions, and outcomes were measured using the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) and UCLA PTSD Reaction Index for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-Fourth Edition (DSM-IV; UPID) at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months postintake. RESULTS: Piecewise linear growth curve modeling revealed that during the trauma narrative phase of TF-CBT, caregivers' cognitive-emotional processing of their own and their child's trauma-related reactions predicted decreases in youth internalizing and externalizing symptoms over treatment. Caregiver support predicted lower internalizing symptoms over follow-up. In contrast, caregiver avoidance and blame of the child predicted worsening of youth internalizing and externalizing symptoms over follow-up. Caregiver avoidance early in treatment also predicted worsening of externalizing symptoms over follow-up. During the narrative phase, caregiver blame and avoidance were correlated with more child overgeneralization of trauma beliefs, and blame was also associated with less child accommodation of balanced beliefs. CONCLUSIONS: The association between in-session caregiver behaviors and youth symptomatology during and after TF-CBT highlights the importance of assessing and targeting these behaviors to improve clinical outcomes. (PsycINFO Database Record
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".