A Survey of the Assessment Practices of Child and Adolescent Clinicians.

Abstract

Practicing child and adolescent clinicians (N=309) completed a survey regarding their actual and preferred child and adolescent assessment practices. Most reported using the following tools: family interview, individual child/teen interview, and a review of previous treatment records. The majority reported interviewing the identified child/teen patient and the adults in the home with a parental role. Clinicians reported they would also prefer to use parent rating scales, teacher rating scales, child/teen self-report scales, naturalistic observation, and a review of recent report cards and previous educational testing. The top 3 factors reported to influence assessment practice were ethics, organizational pressures, and theoretical orientation. Twenty-one percent of the sample reported that research findings are unimportant in their assessment decision making.

Introduction to the Special Issue: Toward Implementing Physiological Measures in Clinical Child and Adolescent Assessments

“…incorporated use of multiple informants, measures, and measurement modalities (Achenbach, Krukowski, Dumenci, & Ivanova, 2005;Hunsley & Mash, 2007). However, surveys of mental health professionals' assessment practices, as well as quantitative reviews of the methodological characteristics of treatment studies, find that mental health professionals who work with children and adolescents rarely use methods other than informants' reports and observed behavior (Jensen-Doss & Hawley, 2010;Palmiter, 2004;Weisz et al, 2005). Second, research and practice areas in which biological systems feature squarely in conceptualizations of symptom expression rarely use biological measures.…”

“…It is important to note that a large body of basic empirical research indicates significant relations between activity on these measures and mental health concerns (e.g., APA, 2013;Insel et al, 2010;Sanislow et al, 2010). Further, two of these measures-namely, informants' reports and observed behavior-also have a long history and frequency of use in mental health assessments (e.g., Jensen-Doss & Hawley, 2010;Palmiter, 2004;Weisz, Jensen-Doss, & Hawley, 2005). However, recent work indicates that mental health professionals rarely implement physiological measures within clinical and empirical work (e.g., for reviews, see Davis, May, & Whiting, 2011;.…”

“…In fact, advancements in the research movement dedicated to identifying effective assessment practices (i.e., ''evidence-based assessment'') have historically experienced delays relative to advancements in identifying effective treatment practices, perhaps because the first evidence-based practice initiatives and practice guidelines emphasized treatment practices (see Hunsley & Mash, 2007). Along these lines, the prevalence of evidence-based assessment usage is unacceptably low for widely available interview and survey measures (Jensen-Doss & Hawley, 2010;Palmiter, 2004). This does not bode well for incorporating new indices in routine clinical practice that may require additional personnel training and costs, such as physiological measures.…”

Diagnostic Practices for Traumatized Youths: Do Clinicians Incorporate Symptom Scale Results?

“…Indeed, most youth mental health providers today are either masters' level social workers, marriage and family therapists, or counselors. In addition, recent surveys indicate that approximately only 29% of child clinicians use dimensional rating scales in assessment (Palmiter 2004), and that most child clinicians consider self-report inventories to be of low diagnostic utility (Cashel 2002). One study of child clinicians in CMHCs also reported that 90% believed formal assessment measures pose a significant time burden .…”

“…These scales require less training time and take substantially less time to complete, thus costing less to administer. Partly for these reasons, dimensional rating scales are becoming part of routine practice in several state mental health systems (Palmiter 2004). …”