Treatment protected clients from premature death compared with people who did not receive treatment and also those who ceased treatment. While amphetamine users had a lower risk of mortality compared with opiate users, the full extent of the relationship between amphetamine use and mortality needs to be examined further.
Objectives The efficacy of cognitive behaviour therapies for psychosis (CBTp) has been sufficiently established for its inclusion in some national treatment guidelines. However, treatment efficacy does not guarantee effectiveness in routine practice, where clinician expertise and patient mix may be different. Thus, we evaluated the applicability, acceptability and effectiveness of CBTp when offered routinely in a public mental health service. Design A prospectively recruited representative sample (N = 94) of patients with psychotic disorders from a geographic catchment area in Melbourne, Australia, was randomized to CBTp or treatment as usual. Method The CBTp intervention included psychoeducation, positive symptom, and co‐morbid problem components. Therapists collaboratively negotiated goals with patients and utilized treatment components from a manual. Intention‐to‐treat analyses used data at baseline, 9 months and 18 months. Results Working alliance and client satisfaction measures indicated excellent acceptability. Both groups improved to a similar degree on the Positive And Negative Syndrome Scale, with no advantage for the CBTp group. The most frequent CBTp components implemented were co‐morbid disorders/personal issues and personalized psychoeducation; working with persisting symptoms was the main focus in relatively few sessions. Conclusions The lack of advantage for the CBTp group may be due to: the infrequent focus on positive symptoms (the most replicated outcome domain for CBTp); the unselected nature of the patients (rather than those with distressing symptoms or referred by clinicians); or, to insufficient therapist expertise.
Inconsistencies in the operationalisation of dyslexia in assessment practices are concerning. Variations in different countries' education contexts and education‐related legislation could contribute to continuing discrepancies between psychologists' assessment practices. However, an international “snapshot” of these practices is unavailable. An international comparison of psychologists' dyslexia assessment practices could help ascertain whether there are contextual factors that can foster converging practices. Accordingly, this study systematically reviewed the literature to capture how psychologists identify and/or diagnose dyslexia across English‐speaking countries. Quantitative and/or qualitative studies, published between 2013 and 2021, that investigated psychologists' self‐reported methods for assessing, identifying, and/or diagnosing individuals with dyslexia were included. Eleven studies (published across fourteen papers) met the inclusion criteria. Most included studies sampled school psychologists who work in the USA. Psychologists' dyslexia assessment practices were diverse (including the use of cognitive discrepancy and response‐to‐intervention methods). The results highlight an international need to develop a consensus operational definition of dyslexia and universal assessment guidelines. Future research might investigate the practices and beliefs of psychologists who work outside of the USA, and to be inclusive of adult populations. Implications for research and training are explored.
Historically, the professional structure of higher education has provided restricted employment, career, and leadership opportunities for women. This is exacerbated where there is an intersection between gender and race, culture, religion, or age. Women continue to be underrepresented in senior leadership positions across a range of disciplines, and this lack of representation of women within the professional structure of higher education itself acts as a barrier for more women reaching senior levels within institutions. More women are needed in higher positions to increase representation and visibility, and to encourage and mentor others to then aspire to follow a similar path. This critical review examines gender equity across the major career benchmarks of the academy in light of the impact of the personal contexts of women, systemic processes, and cultural barriers that hinder career progression. Research-based systemic solutions that work towards improved gender equity for women are discussed. The findings from this critical review highlight the need for global systemic change in higher education to create ethical equities in the employment, career, and leadership opportunities for women.
This study examined the effects of a school-based cognitive-behavioural group intervention for anxiety in young children, Get Lost Mr Scary, on child self-reported anxiety and coping skills. Participants included 65 children (Mage= 6.50 years,SDage= 0.75) drawn from 13 public primary schools located in Western Sydney, Australia. The children participated in seven weekly 1-hour Get Lost Mr Scary sessions, and their parents attended three information sessions. The pictorial semistructured Child Anxiety and Coping Interview (CACI) was used to elicit the children's self-report of their anxiety symptoms, emotions, coping strategies, and coping efficacy before and after the 7-week intervention. Although children rated their maladaptive coping strategies as helpful, the postintervention results indicated a significant decrease in the use of maladaptive strategies such as behavioural avoidance and an increase in adaptive cognitive strategies, particularly cognitive restructuring. Consistent with parent and teacher reports, child self-reports indicated a significant reduction in anxiety and negative emotional distress. The clinical implications of the findings are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.