Gaps in Detection: Comparing Provider- and Client-Reported Indicators of Engagement in Youth Telemental Health.

Eleanor G Wu,Kimberly D Becker,Benjamin M Isenberg,Hyun Seon Park,Jonathan K Ahuna,Sophie Arkin,Bruce F Chorpita
{"title":"Gaps in Detection: Comparing Provider- and Client-Reported Indicators of Engagement in Youth Telemental Health.","authors":"Eleanor G Wu,Kimberly D Becker,Benjamin M Isenberg,Hyun Seon Park,Jonathan K Ahuna,Sophie Arkin,Bruce F Chorpita","doi":"10.1080/15374416.2026.2626905","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\r\nDetecting engagement problems is crucial for delivering timely engagement intervention. Telemental health services (TMH) present challenges to how providers assess engagement. This study examined how providers detected low engagement, both broadly and at the level of specific engagement dimensions, and how they characterized low and high engagement among active cases.\r\n\r\nMETHOD\r\nYouth and/or caregivers (N = 153) receiving TMH completed a survey based on an empirically validated framework assessing five engagement dimensions, yielding scores indicating risk for low engagement. School-based providers (N = 49) completed a survey on which they identified indicators of low and/or high engagement for participating cases. Indicators were qualitatively coded across these five dimensions.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nNearly 40% of cases met a predefined cutoff for low engagement on the self-report survey; however, 79% of these cases were not identified by providers as at risk. For the 21% of cases in which low engagement was detected, provider-reported indicators matched the self-reported engagement dimension(s) 23% of the time. Low engagement was more likely to be accurately detected for participation-oriented dimensions (i.e. attendance, homework/in-session participation) than for process-oriented dimensions (i.e. relationship, expectancy, clarity) (p = .004). Providers predominantly reported indicators of high and low engagement consistent with attendance and homework/in-session participation.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSION\r\nLow engagement in TMH - especially when reflected in process-oriented engagement dimensions - is less consistently identified by providers. Tools such as multidimensional engagement surveys may facilitate early and ongoing detection of low engagement in service delivery, which could improve providers' ability to address engagement concerns.","PeriodicalId":501764,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology","volume":"8 1","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2026.2626905","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Detecting engagement problems is crucial for delivering timely engagement intervention. Telemental health services (TMH) present challenges to how providers assess engagement. This study examined how providers detected low engagement, both broadly and at the level of specific engagement dimensions, and how they characterized low and high engagement among active cases. METHOD Youth and/or caregivers (N = 153) receiving TMH completed a survey based on an empirically validated framework assessing five engagement dimensions, yielding scores indicating risk for low engagement. School-based providers (N = 49) completed a survey on which they identified indicators of low and/or high engagement for participating cases. Indicators were qualitatively coded across these five dimensions. RESULTS Nearly 40% of cases met a predefined cutoff for low engagement on the self-report survey; however, 79% of these cases were not identified by providers as at risk. For the 21% of cases in which low engagement was detected, provider-reported indicators matched the self-reported engagement dimension(s) 23% of the time. Low engagement was more likely to be accurately detected for participation-oriented dimensions (i.e. attendance, homework/in-session participation) than for process-oriented dimensions (i.e. relationship, expectancy, clarity) (p = .004). Providers predominantly reported indicators of high and low engagement consistent with attendance and homework/in-session participation. CONCLUSION Low engagement in TMH - especially when reflected in process-oriented engagement dimensions - is less consistently identified by providers. Tools such as multidimensional engagement surveys may facilitate early and ongoing detection of low engagement in service delivery, which could improve providers' ability to address engagement concerns.
检测差距:比较提供者和客户报告的青少年远程心理健康参与指标。
目的发现敬业问题对于提供及时的敬业干预至关重要。远程心理健康服务(TMH)对提供者如何评估参与提出了挑战。本研究考察了供应商如何在广泛和特定参与维度层面上发现低参与度,以及他们如何在活跃案例中描述低参与度和高参与度。方法接受TMH的青少年和/或护理人员(N = 153)完成了一项基于经验验证的框架的调查,该框架评估了五个参与维度,得出分数表明低参与的风险。基于学校的供应商(N = 49)完成了一项调查,在该调查中,他们确定了参与案例的低参与度和/或高参与度指标。指标在这五个方面进行了定性编码。结果在自我报告调查中,近40%的案例达到了预先设定的低敬业度临界值;然而,这些病例中有79%没有被提供者确定为有风险。在21%发现低敬业度的案例中,供应商报告的指标在23%的情况下与自我报告的敬业度维度相匹配。参与导向的维度(如出勤率、作业/会议参与)比过程导向的维度(如关系、期望、清晰度)更容易准确地检测到低敬业度(p = 0.004)。供应商主要报告了与出勤和家庭作业/课堂参与一致的高参与度和低参与度指标。结论TMH的低敬业度——特别是在面向流程的敬业度维度上——被提供者认为不太一致。多维参与度调查等工具可以促进对服务交付中参与度低的早期和持续检测,从而提高提供者解决参与度问题的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书