External and Internal Validity Considerations in Youth Effectiveness Trials: Lessons Learned from the COMET Study.

IF 4.2 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Amanda Jensen-Doss, Grace Woodard, Zabin Patel-Syed, Jill Ehrenreich-May, David Rosenfield, Golda S Ginsburg
{"title":"External and Internal Validity Considerations in Youth Effectiveness Trials: Lessons Learned from the COMET Study.","authors":"Amanda Jensen-Doss, Grace Woodard, Zabin Patel-Syed, Jill Ehrenreich-May, David Rosenfield, Golda S Ginsburg","doi":"10.1080/15374416.2023.2272958","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Effectiveness trials aim to increase the generalizability and public health impact of interventions. However, challenges associated with this design present threats to external and internal validity. This paper illustrates these challenges using data from a two-site randomized effectiveness trial, the Community Study of Outcome Monitoring for Emotional Disorders in Teens (COMET) and presents recommendations for future research.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>COMET was a randomized effectiveness trial conducted in 19 community mental health clinics in two states comparing three interventions: treatment as usual (TAU), TAU with measurement-based care (TAU+), and the Unified Protocol forTransdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders in Adolescents with MBC (UPA). Participants included 176 clinicians (mean age = 35.5; 85.8% cisgender female; 53.0% racially and/or ethnically minorized) and 196 adolescents (mean age = 14.7; 65.3% cisgender female; 69.4% racially and/or ethnically minorized). Analyses outlined participant flow from recruitment to study completion, described participant characteristics, and examined site differences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Analysis of participant flow suggested that recruitment and retention of clinicians and adolescents was challenging, raising questions about whether participants were representative of participating clinics. Both the clinician and adolescent samples were racially and ethnically diverse and adolescents were low income and clinically complex. Significant site differences were observed in clinician and adolescent characteristics.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While this study was successful in recruiting a diverse and historically under-represented sample, difficulties in recruitment and retention raise questions about external validity and site differences present challenges to internal validity of study findings. Suggestions for future effectiveness studies, drawing from implementation science approaches, are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48350,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"735-749"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10655847/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2023.2272958","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Effectiveness trials aim to increase the generalizability and public health impact of interventions. However, challenges associated with this design present threats to external and internal validity. This paper illustrates these challenges using data from a two-site randomized effectiveness trial, the Community Study of Outcome Monitoring for Emotional Disorders in Teens (COMET) and presents recommendations for future research.

Method: COMET was a randomized effectiveness trial conducted in 19 community mental health clinics in two states comparing three interventions: treatment as usual (TAU), TAU with measurement-based care (TAU+), and the Unified Protocol forTransdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders in Adolescents with MBC (UPA). Participants included 176 clinicians (mean age = 35.5; 85.8% cisgender female; 53.0% racially and/or ethnically minorized) and 196 adolescents (mean age = 14.7; 65.3% cisgender female; 69.4% racially and/or ethnically minorized). Analyses outlined participant flow from recruitment to study completion, described participant characteristics, and examined site differences.

Results: Analysis of participant flow suggested that recruitment and retention of clinicians and adolescents was challenging, raising questions about whether participants were representative of participating clinics. Both the clinician and adolescent samples were racially and ethnically diverse and adolescents were low income and clinically complex. Significant site differences were observed in clinician and adolescent characteristics.

Conclusions: While this study was successful in recruiting a diverse and historically under-represented sample, difficulties in recruitment and retention raise questions about external validity and site differences present challenges to internal validity of study findings. Suggestions for future effectiveness studies, drawing from implementation science approaches, are discussed.

青少年有效性试验的外部和内部有效性考虑因素:COMET研究的经验教训。
目的:有效性试验旨在提高干预措施的可推广性和对公共卫生的影响。然而,与这种设计相关的挑战对外部和内部有效性构成了威胁。本文使用两个站点的随机有效性试验——青少年情绪障碍结果监测社区研究(COMET)的数据说明了这些挑战,并为未来的研究提出了建议。方法:COMET是一项在两个州的19家社区心理健康诊所进行的随机有效性试验,比较了三种干预措施:照常治疗(TAU)、基于测量的护理的TAU(TAU+)和MBC青少年情绪障碍跨诊断治疗统一方案(UPA)。参与者包括176名临床医生(平均年龄 = 35.5;85.8%为顺性别女性;53.0%为种族和/或少数民族)和196名青少年(平均年龄 = 14.7;65.3%为顺性别女性;69.4%为种族和/或少数民族)。分析概述了从招募到研究完成的参与者流程,描述了参与者特征,并检查了站点差异。结果:对参与者流的分析表明,临床医生和青少年的招募和保留具有挑战性,这引发了参与者是否代表参与诊所的问题。临床医生和青少年样本的种族和民族多样,青少年收入低,临床复杂。在临床医生和青少年特征方面观察到显著的位点差异。结论:虽然这项研究成功地招募了一个多样化且历史上代表性不足的样本,但招募和保留的困难引发了对外部有效性的质疑,而位点差异对研究结果的内部有效性提出了挑战。根据实施科学方法,讨论了对未来有效性研究的建议。
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
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology (JCCAP) is the official journal for the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, American Psychological Association. It publishes original contributions on the following topics: (a) the development and evaluation of assessment and intervention techniques for use with clinical child and adolescent populations; (b) the development and maintenance of clinical child and adolescent problems; (c) cross-cultural and sociodemographic issues that have a clear bearing on clinical child and adolescent psychology in terms of theory, research, or practice; and (d) training and professional practice in clinical child and adolescent psychology, as well as child advocacy.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信