Implementation of a Brief Dialectical Behavioral Therapy Skills Group in High Schools for At-Risk Youth: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adolescence is a developmental period marked by engagement in risk-taking behaviors, especially among impulsive or emotionally dysregulated youth. Thus, interventions that teach skills to reduce the risk of negative outcomes associated with emotional dysregulation are required. Social and emotional learning (SEL) programs have been developed to address both adolescent emotional dysregulation and risk-taking behaviors; however, current programs have mostly been implemented among younger youth and are used as a tier 1 universal intervention rather than a targeted tier 2 intervention for youth identified with emotional regulation difficulties. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to address the need for SEL programming that can be delivered in schools, particularly for older youth who have difficulties with emotional or behavioral dysregulation, to reduce the risk of health-risk behaviors among this population. METHODS: Here, we outline the implementation of an SEL intervention titled Going 4 Goals, a 9-session adaptation of the Dialectical Behavioral Therapy for Adolescents (DBT-A) program delivered to at-risk high school students in a school setting. The primary objectives of the study are to test whether participating in the skills group intervention produces significant increases in the core DBT-A skills of mindfulness, emotional regulation, distress tolerance, and interpersonal effectiveness, while also producing significant decreases in substance use and risky behaviors. These primary outcomes are based on changes in participant scores between baseline and after the intervention and follow-ups at 1, 3, and 6 months compared with a control group of youth participating in the school's health curriculum at the same time points. Qualitative interviews will also be conducted with intervention participants and school staff to examine acceptability and facilitators of and barriers to the intervention. RESULTS: A total of 171 participants across 13 groups had been enrolled in the intervention, with data collection ending December 2021. Data analysis will begin in the spring of 2022, with expected results to be published in the spring of 2023. CONCLUSIONS: This paper describes the protocol of the 9-session school-based adaptation of the DBT-A intervention and discusses the strengths and limitations of the study and future directions. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/32490.
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 | 0.028 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.044 | 0.010 |
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".