When the torch is passed, does the flame still burn? Testing a “train the supervisor” model for the Child STEPs treatment program.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We assessed sustainability of an empirically supported, transdiagnostic youth psychotherapy program when therapist supervision was shifted from external experts to internal clinic staff. METHOD: One hundred sixty-eight youths, aged 6-15 years, 59.5% male, 85.1% Caucasian, were treated for anxiety, depression, traumatic stress, or conduct problems by clinicians employed in community mental health clinics. In Phase 1 (2.7 years), 1 group of clinicians, the Sustain group, received training in Child STEPs (a modular transdiagnostic treatment + weekly feedback on youth response) and treated clinic-referred youths, guided by weekly supervision from external STEPs experts. In Phase 2 (2.9 years), Sustain clinicians treated additional youths but with supervision by clinic staff who had been trained to supervise STEPs. Also in Phase 2, a new group, External Supervision clinicians, received training and supervision from external STEPs experts and treated referred youths. Phase 2 youths were randomized to Sustain or External Supervision clinicians. Groups were compared on 3 therapist fidelity measures and 14 clinical outcome measures. RESULTS: Sustain clinicians maintained their previous levels of fidelity and youth outcomes after switching from external to internal supervision; and in Phase 2, the Sustain and External Supervision groups also did not differ on fidelity or youth outcomes. Whereas all 34 group comparisons were nonsignificant, trends with the largest effect sizes showed better clinical outcomes for internal than external supervision. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of empirically supported transdiagnostic treatment may be sustained when supervision is transferred from external experts to trained clinic staff, potentially enhancing cost-effectiveness and staying power in clinical practice. (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 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 | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".