Vignette-based methodologies are frequently used to examine judgments and decision-making processes, including clinical judgments made by health professionals. Concerns are sometimes raised that vignettes do not accurately reflect “real world” phenomena, and that this affects the validity of results and conclusions of these studies. This article provides an overview of the defining features, design variations, strengths, and weaknesses of vignette studies as a way of examining how health professionals form clinical judgments (e.g., assigning diagnoses, selecting treatments). As a “hybrid” of traditional survey and experimental methods, vignette studies can offer aspects of both the high internal validity of experiments and the high external validity of survey research in order to disentangle multiple predictors of clinician behavior. When vignette studies are well designed to test specific questions about judgments and decision-making, they can be highly generalizable to “real life” behavior, while overcoming the ethical, practical, and scientific limitations associated with alternative methods (e.g., observation, self-report, standardized patients, archival analysis). We conclude with methodological recommendations and a description of how vignette methodologies are being used to investigate clinicians’ diagnostic decisions in case-controlled field studies for the ICD-11 classification of mental and behavioural disorders, and how these studies illustrate the preceding concepts and recommendations

IMPORTANCE Mobile health interventions are increasingly popular in pediatrics; however, it is unclear how effective these interventions are in changing health outcomes.OBJECTIVE To determine the effectiveness of mobile health interventions for improving health outcomes in youth 18 years or younger.DATA SOURCES Studies published through November 30, 2016, were collected through PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Educational Resources Information Center, and PsychINFO. Backward and forward literature searches were conducted on articles meeting study inclusion criteria. Search terms included telemedicine, eHealth, mobile health, mHealth, app, and mobile application.STUDY SELECTION Search results were limited to infants, children, adolescents, or young adults when possible. Studies were included if quantitative methods were used to evaluate an application of mobile intervention technology in a primary or secondary capacity to promote or modify health behavior in youth 18 years or younger. Studies were excluded if the article was an unpublished dissertation or thesis, the mean age of participants was older than 18 years, the study did not assess a health behavior and disease outcome, or the article did not include sufficient statistics. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied by 2 independent coders with 20% overlap. Of 9773 unique articles, 36 articles (containing 37 unique studies with a total of 29 822 participants) met the inclusion criteria. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESISOf 9773 unique articles, 36 articles (containing 37 unique studies) with a total of 29 822 participants met the inclusion criteria. Effect sizes were calculated from statistical tests that could be converted to standardized mean differences. All aggregate effect sizes and moderator variables were tested using random-effects models. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Change in health behavior or disease control.RESULTS A total of 29 822 participants were included in the studies. In studies that reported sex, the total number of females was 11 226 (53.2%). Of those reporting age, the average was 11.35 years. The random effects aggregate effect size of mobile health interventions was significant (n = 37; Cohen d = 0.22; 95% CI, 0.14-0.29). The random effects model indicated that providing mobile health intervention to a caregiver increased the strength of the intervention effect. Studies that involved caregivers in the intervention produced effect sizes (n = 16; Cohen d = 0.28; 95% CI, 0.18-0.39) larger than those that did not include caregivers (n = 21; Cohen d = 0.13; 95% CI, 0.02-0.25). Other coded variables did not moderate study effect size.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Mobile health interventions appear to be a viable health behavior change intervention modality for youth. Given the ubiquity of mobile phones, mobile health interventions offer promise in improving public health.

If a doctoral dissertation represents an original investigation that makes a contribution to one’s field, then dissertation research could, and arguably should, be disseminated into the scientific literature. However, the extent and nature of dissertation publication remains largely unknown within psychology. The present study investigated the peer-reviewed publication outcomes of psychology dissertation research in the United States. Additionally, we examined publication lag, scientific impact, and variations across subfields. To investigate these questions, we first drew a stratified random cohort sample of 910 psychology Ph.D. dissertations from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. Next, we conducted comprehensive literature searches for peer-reviewed journal articles derived from these dissertations published 0–7 years thereafter. Published dissertation articles were coded for their bibliographic details, citation rates, and journal impact metrics. Results showed that only one-quarter (25.6% [95% CI: 23.0, 28.4]) of dissertations were ultimately published in peer-reviewed journals, with significant variations across subfields (range: 10.1 to 59.4%). Rates of dissertation publication were lower in professional/applied subfields (e.g., clinical, counseling) compared to research/academic subfields (e.g., experimental, cognitive). When dissertations were published, however, they often appeared in influential journals (e.g., Thomson Reuters Impact Factor M = 2.84 [2.45, 3.23], 5-year Impact Factor M = 3.49 [3.07, 3.90]) and were cited numerous times (Web of Science citations per year M = 3.65 [2.88, 4.42]). Publication typically occurred within 2–3 years after the dissertation year. Overall, these results indicate that the large majority of Ph.D. dissertation research in psychology does not get disseminated into the peer-reviewed literature. The non-publication of dissertation research appears to be a systemic problem affecting both research and training in psychology. Efforts to improve the quality and “publishability” of doctoral dissertation research could benefit psychological science on multiple fronts.

Objective Although the primary care setting has been recommended as an acceptable environment for pediatric overweight/obesity treatment, a quantitative analysis has not been conducted to determine the effectiveness of pediatric weight management interventions delivered in these settings. Therefore, the purpose of the current study was to conduct a meta-analysis of weight management interventions for youth in primary care settings. Method A literature search using PsycINFO and PubMed was conducted to identify articles published through October 2015. Eighteen studies (3,358 participants) met inclusion criteria; studies included a treatment and comparison group and targeted individuals or families for treatment. Study characteristics were coded, and study rigor of articles was assessed. Results The overall effect size for change in BMI in primary care weight management interventions compared to control groups was small but statistically significant (d = 0.26, 95% CI [0.14, 0.38]). The number of treatment contacts, treatment months, and visits with a pediatrician emerged as significant moderators of outcome, such that BMI reduction was positively related to greater contact. Conclusions In comparison to control conditions, weight management programs in primary care settings can be effective for BMI reduction, suggesting that primary care is a suitable setting for treatment of pediatric overweight/obesity. Additionally, treatments that were longer in duration, included more contacts (in person or phone), and included more contacts by a pediatrician had greater impact on BMI reduction. Future studies should continue to examine other aspects of acceptability and accessibility as well as demonstrate the effectiveness of interventions on improving psychosocial outcomes.

Objective: Serious childhood illnesses such as cancer affect all family members. Siblings experience strong emotions and disruptions to their routines as families reorganize to confront the disease and manage treatment. Addressing siblings' psychosocial needs is a standard of care in pediatric oncology, but siblings' needs are rarely met because of systematic barriers in our health care system. Thus, we aimed to re-envision sibling care. We used an appreciative inquiry approach to inform systematic screening of siblings' psychosocial risk and unmet needs as a first step toward providing appropriate support. Method: Sibling-focused researchers, clinicians, policymakers, advocates, and families of youth with cancer (N = 29) convened for a 2-day community stakeholder-centered international summit to create a vision for standardizing and optimizing sibling-focused psychosocial screening and assessment as a pathway to care, including crafting a research agenda and articulating best clinical practices. Results: Summit attendees created a detailed framework for best practices in universal sibling psychosocial screening and pathways to support. The framework emphasizes links between hospital- and community-based care. It highlights the need to prepare systems to feasibly and effectively attend to siblings' needs and recommends incorporating siblings into family-based psychosocial screening at cancer diagnosis, systematically conducting sibling-focused psychosocial screening during and after cancer treatment, and connecting siblings with community-based resources. Conclusion: A systematic approach to sibling psychosocial services expands the idea of family-centered care to include siblings and ensures that siblings' needs are adequately recognized and met. This framework was created in the context of cancer but is applicable across illness groups.

Hispanic parents, particularly mothers, are at risk for lower feelings of satisfaction and competence as parents. More research is needed to understand cultural factors related to these differences.

Youth with SB with lower levels of neuropsychological functioning may be at risk for poorer social competence and, as a result, greater internalizing symptoms. Interventions that promote social competence, while being sensitive to cognitive capacities, could potentially alleviate or prevent internalizing symptoms in these youth.

Parenting behaviors related to autonomy have long-term consequences for adjustment in emerging adults with and without SB.