Documents disponibles écrits par cet auteur

Effects of Incentives on Families'Long-Term Outcome in a Parenting Program / Nina HEINRICHS in Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 39-5 (September-October 2010) 

Public ISBD [article]  in Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology > 39-5 (September-October 2010) . - p.705-712 Titre : Effects of Incentives on Families'Long-Term Outcome in a Parenting Program Type de document : texte imprimé Auteurs : Nina HEINRICHS, Auteur ; Amanda JENSEN-DOSS, Auteur Année de publication : 2010 Article en page(s) : p.705-712 Langues : Anglais (eng) Index. décimale : PER Périodiques Résumé : To examine the impact of paying for participation in a preventive parenting program on treatment outcomes, 197 families with preschool-aged children were randomized to paid or unpaid conditions. Although both groups improved on nearly all measures, paid families showed less improvement on 3 of 10 variables, including father-reported child prosocial behavior and parenting skills and maternal distress. The interaction between payment and treatment format (individual vs. group) was examined. Compared to unpaid group participants, paid group intervention participants had significantly worse mother and father parenting skills posttreatment, whereas paid individual intervention mothers had significantly better skills. These findings suggest payment may lead to smaller treatment effects, although the bulk of the data point to no impact on outcomes. Given that payment attracts families who would not otherwise receive treatment, this appears to be a viable strategy to recruit families without appreciably impacting outcomes. En ligne : http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2010.501290 Permalink : http://www.cra-rhone-alpes.org/cid/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=1090 [article] Effects of Incentives on Families'Long-Term Outcome in a Parenting Program [texte imprimé] / Nina HEINRICHS, Auteur ; Amanda JENSEN-DOSS, Auteur . - 2010 . - p.705-712. Langues : Anglais (eng) in Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology > 39-5 (September-October 2010) . - p.705-712 Index. décimale : PER Périodiques Résumé : To examine the impact of paying for participation in a preventive parenting program on treatment outcomes, 197 families with preschool-aged children were randomized to paid or unpaid conditions. Although both groups improved on nearly all measures, paid families showed less improvement on 3 of 10 variables, including father-reported child prosocial behavior and parenting skills and maternal distress. The interaction between payment and treatment format (individual vs. group) was examined. Compared to unpaid group participants, paid group intervention participants had significantly worse mother and father parenting skills posttreatment, whereas paid individual intervention mothers had significantly better skills. These findings suggest payment may lead to smaller treatment effects, although the bulk of the data point to no impact on outcomes. Given that payment attracts families who would not otherwise receive treatment, this appears to be a viable strategy to recruit families without appreciably impacting outcomes. En ligne : http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2010.501290 Permalink : http://www.cra-rhone-alpes.org/cid/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=1090

Understanding Barriers to Evidence-Based Assessment: Clinician Attitudes Toward Standardized Assessment Tools / Amanda JENSEN-DOSS in Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 39-6 (November-December 2010) 

Public ISBD [article]  in Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology > 39-6 (November-December 2010) . - p.885-896 Titre : Understanding Barriers to Evidence-Based Assessment: Clinician Attitudes Toward Standardized Assessment Tools Type de document : texte imprimé Auteurs : Amanda JENSEN-DOSS, Auteur ; Kristin M. HAWLEY, Auteur Année de publication : 2010 Article en page(s) : p.885-896 Langues : Anglais (eng) Index. décimale : PER Périodiques Résumé : In an era of evidence-based practice, why are clinicians not typically engaged in evidence-based assessment? To begin to understand this issue, a national multidisciplinary survey was conducted to examine clinician attitudes toward standardized assessment tools. There were 1,442 child clinicians who provided opinions about the psychometric qualities of these tools, their benefit over clinical judgment alone, and their practicality. Doctoral-level clinicians and psychologists expressed more positive ratings in all three domains than master's-level clinicians and nonpsychologists, respectively, although only the disciplinary differences remained significant when predictors were examined simultaneously. All three attitude scales were predictive of standardized assessment tool use, although practical concerns were the strongest and only independent predictor of use. En ligne : http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2010.517169 Permalink : http://www.cra-rhone-alpes.org/cid/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=1136 [article] Understanding Barriers to Evidence-Based Assessment: Clinician Attitudes Toward Standardized Assessment Tools [texte imprimé] / Amanda JENSEN-DOSS, Auteur ; Kristin M. HAWLEY, Auteur . - 2010 . - p.885-896. Langues : Anglais (eng) in Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology > 39-6 (November-December 2010) . - p.885-896 Index. décimale : PER Périodiques Résumé : In an era of evidence-based practice, why are clinicians not typically engaged in evidence-based assessment? To begin to understand this issue, a national multidisciplinary survey was conducted to examine clinician attitudes toward standardized assessment tools. There were 1,442 child clinicians who provided opinions about the psychometric qualities of these tools, their benefit over clinical judgment alone, and their practicality. Doctoral-level clinicians and psychologists expressed more positive ratings in all three domains than master's-level clinicians and nonpsychologists, respectively, although only the disciplinary differences remained significant when predictors were examined simultaneously. All three attitude scales were predictive of standardized assessment tool use, although practical concerns were the strongest and only independent predictor of use. En ligne : http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2010.517169 Permalink : http://www.cra-rhone-alpes.org/cid/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=1136