Implementing Group Parent Training in Telepsychology: Lessons Learned During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We recently transitioned from in-person delivery of a brief behavioral parent intervention to telepsychology delivery to meet families' needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this topical review, we describe how we used treatment fidelity as a guiding principle to orient adaptations for telepsychology, as well as preliminary findings and early lessons learned in this implementation. Methods: Using rapid-cycle quality improvement methods, we adapted a brief parent training group (Bootcamp for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder; BC-ADHD) to three groups of caregivers (i.e., 5-7 families) of school-aged children with ADHD (n = 20; 85% males). Families were from the following ethnic backgrounds: 75% White non-Hispanic, 15% White Hispanic, and 10% Black. Clinicians completed measures on their implementation experience. Observers completed measures on content/process fidelity and attendance. Caregivers completed measures on demographics, treatment satisfaction, and telepsychology experience. RESULTS: Telepsychology BC-ADHD can be implemented with comparably high levels of content and process fidelity and treatment satisfaction to in-person groups; and it appears to be feasible and acceptable to caregivers. Caregiver and clinician qualitative feedback revealed themes of appreciating the convenience of telepsychology, while experiencing some challenges in relating to others and sharing over video. CONCLUSIONS: When treatment fidelity is used as a guiding tool, telepsychology parent training groups can be delivered with high fidelity and appear to be acceptable and feasible to caregivers and clinicians. Future research using larger and more diverse samples, multimethod and multi-informant measurement approaches, and controlled designs is needed to further assess the generalizability and efficacy of telepsychology parent training groups.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".