A meta-analysis of parent management training outcomes for children and adolescents with conduct problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis comprised a meta-analysis examining the efficacy of Parent Management Training (PMT) for children and adolescents with conduct problems (CP). A search of the published literature yielded 499 studies, of which 80 met criteria for inclusion. These 80 studies generated 461 standardized mean gain effect sizes representing pretest to posttest change on measures of child CP for 119 intervention groups comprising 3325 individual youth and 42 control groups or 1645 individual youth. Hundreds of additional effect sizes were calculated for outcome variables examining generalization and collateral effects of PMT. Follow-up data at six months, one year, and beyond one year were also available. The analysis confirmed that PMT is a successful intervention in reducing childhood CP with maintenance of gains up to at least one year. Significant differences were found depending on which source was reporting on child CP. Parent-reports were associated with the greatest improvements, independent observers saw more modest gains, and teachers reported very little change. Child characteristics, family characteristics, methodological quality, and treatment quality were found to significantly moderate outcome. Other moderators (e.g., ADHD co-morbidity, father involvement, SES) demonstrated mixed effects and require further study and replication. In terms of cost-effectiveness, self-administered training, which was the least costly form of intervention examined, was not as effective as group or individual treatment. Moreover, standard PMT was more effective than programs that also sought to provide teacher training and/or child behaviour therapy. Results suggested that some generalization strategies as well as therapeutic enhancements directed toward parents are likely to improve treatment effects. The results are discussed in relation to previous meta-analyses and implications for research and practice.
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 | 0.018 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.048 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".