This study examines 24‐months post‐baseline outcomes for thirty‐five Swedish antisocial youths who received either treatment in multidimensional treatment foster care (MTFC) or treatment as usual (TAU). MTFC is a community‐based treatment programme that has been successful in treating chronic juvenile offenders in the USA. This study is the first randomized control study outside the USA. The youth treated in the MTFC programme consistently showed some statistically significant positive treatment effects compared to the youth exposed to TAU. The results suggest that MTFC might be an effective method in treating youth with severe behaviour problems in a Swedish context. The authors conclude that the programme ought to be of great interest for Swedish social services as an alternative to traditional care.

Purpose: A systematic review was conducted to analyze the inter-rater reliability, cross-informant consistency, test-retest reliability, and temporal stability of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), and its ability to discriminate. Method: We searched three databases for articles about the SDQ (parent, teacher, and self-report version), used samples of children up to age 18 and reported inter-rater reliability, cross-informant reliability, test-retest reliability, temporal stability, specificity, sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Results: Focusing on the TDS, inter-rater, and cross-informant reliability showed acceptable values, but respondent types (e.g., mothers and fathers) are not interchangeable. Test-retest reliability and temporal stability were also acceptable, and not excessively high. Specificity and NPV were acceptable but not sensitivity and PPV. Discussion and Conclusion: Greater transparency is needed about who the respondent is when the term "parents" is used. The SDQ is an important supplement to service-as-usual assessments by social care professionals.

Objective: Foster family care is associated with adverse short- and long-term consequences for the child. A systematic review was conducted on interventions for foster children and foster careers. Method: A comprehensive search process was used to find eligible interventions evaluated in randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies. The quality of studies was assessed with GRADE, and effects were synthesized using meta-analytic methods. Results: In all, 28 publications of 18 interventions, including 5,357 children, were identified. Only three specific interventions had sufficient confidence of evidence. No study had examined tools for foster parent selection nor had evaluated preservice programs related to outcomes. Discussion: These analyses provide new insights and hope into the field of systematic interventions in foster care. The overall results indicate that it is possible to improve eight outcomes but cannot point out which programs are superior. Ethically, social care organizations should systematically collect knowledge about effects and side effects.

Children displaying early disruptive behaviour problems (DBP) in school are at risk for severe long-term problems. This study evaluated and compared a systemic school-based intervention, Marte Meo and Coordination meetings (MAC) with service as usual (SAU) in a randomised controlled trial. The teachers' and parents' ratings were collected before and after intervention. Target group were children aged 3-12 years that displayed DBPs in school (N = 99). MAC programme was more effective than SAU in reducing DBPs among school children based on teachers' reports (d ppc2 .30-.38), whereas the effect was equal according to parents' reports. It is possible to achieve changes in children's DBPs in a school setting. Advantages of MAC might be explained by a clear target for change enhancing children's development in school, but might also be explained by shortcomings in SAU, which seems to generate more services and personnel.