A qualitative study on the implementation of a transdiagnostic cognitive behavioral therapy for children in a child welfare residential treatment program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Youth with severe emotional or behavioral issues who are involved with child welfare authorities are sometimes placed in intensive care services in a residential treatment program. Evidence-based psychotherapies are often used in residential treatments, but there is very little research on how to adapt psychotherapy for residential treatment. OBJECTIVE: To describe the implementation of a transdiagnostic cognitive behavioral therapy (the Unified Protocol for Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders in Children) in a residential treatment program for children. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Staff (n = 20) at a residential facility in Calgary, Canada. METHODS: A combination of qualitative interviews and focus groups were conducted before and after therapy to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation. Data were analyzed and reported using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Implementation Strategies. RESULTS: Modifications were made to the program including creating inclusive language, integrating relevant content targeting pediatric irritability, delivering sessions online for caregivers, and using additional staff to support youth to learn and practice the application of the content and behavioral interventions. Key barriers to implementation of the Unified Protocol included staff turnover and the difficulty of sustaining a critical mass of knowledge surrounding the Unified Protocol. The major facilitators to implementation were the perceived quality of the program and advantages of the program to children and their caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the feasibility and acceptability of providing transdiagnostic cognitive behavioral therapies for children in residential treatment and provides a template for how to implement evidence-based practice in residential treatment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".