Efficient Monitoring of Treatment Response during Youth Psychotherapy: The Behavior and Feelings Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An emerging trend in youth psychotherapy is measurement-based care (MBC): treatment guided by frequent measurement of client response, with ongoing feedback to the treating clinician. MBC is especially needed for treatment that addresses internalizing and externalizing problems, which are common among treatment-seeking youths. A very brief measure is needed, for frequent administration, generating both youth- and caregiver-reports, meeting psychometric standards, and available at no cost. We developed such a measure to monitor youth response during psychotherapy for internalizing and externalizing problems. Across 4 studies, we used ethnically diverse, clinically relevant samples of caregivers and youths ages 7-15 to develop and test the Behavior and Feelings Survey (BFS). In Study 1, candidate items identified by outpatient youths and their caregivers were examined via an MTurk survey, with item response theory methods used to eliminate misfitting items. Studies 2-4 used separate clinical samples of youths and their caregivers to finalize the 12-item BFS (6 internalizing and 6 externalizing items), examine its psychometric properties, and assess its performance in monitoring progress during psychotherapy. The BFS showed robust factor structure, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent and discriminant validity in relation to three well-established symptom measures, and slopes of change indicating efficacy in monitoring treatment progress during therapy. The BFS is a brief, free youth- and caregiver-report measure of internalizing and externalizing problems, with psychometric evidence supporting its use for MBC in clinical and research contexts.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".