Anxious youth in research and service clinics

The impact of comorbidity profiles on clinical and psychosocial functioning in childhood anxiety disorders

“…Our results suggest less variability in severity amongst youth with primary anxiety presenting to community mental health settings, regardless of their comorbidity. This may be due to increased severity overall amongst youth presenting to community-based clinics, consistent with previous findings (Villabø et al, 2013); however, this may also be a result of modest sample sizes in each group that limits statistical power with multiple between-group comparisons.…”

“…Studies vary in their findings about whether youth in community mental health settings present with similar (Southam-Gerow et al, 2003) or higher levels of anxiety symptoms (Villabø et al, 2013). However, overall, findings suggest that youth presenting to community mental health clinics tend to have higher rates of comorbid externalizing problems (particularly conduct problems) than those from research clinics, and are more likely to come from lower-income and single-parent families (Southam-Gerow et al, 2003;Villabø et al, 2013). Replicating existing results in a community-based sample is important to generalize findings across settings, adding to the external validity of comorbidity profiles.…”

Enrolment of children in psychosocial care: problems upon entry, care received, and outcomes achieved

“…The few available studies suggest at least some overlap in the types of problems addressed by the various care types. However, these previous studies have addressed only the child’s problems, without considering problems in their social and economic context [ 3 , 11 – 14 ]. Moreover, there is little evidence on the effectiveness of the design itself: which problems could best be referred to which types of psychosocial care.…”

Are the Clinical Characteristics of Anxious Youths Participating in Non-treatment-Related Research Comparable to those of Youths Receiving Treatment?

“…Investigators have also compared the clinical characteristics of clients receiving treatment in research versus non-research settings (Baker-Ericzén et al 2010;Ehrenreich-May et al 2011;Solholm et al 2014;Southam-Gerow et al 2003;Villabø et al 2013). These studies tend to compare groups of clients presenting in different settings but seeking treatment for the same primary concern (e.g., anxiety, conduct).…”

“…Yet, there are some exceptions. One study found significantly more diagnoses among clients from a university clinic relative to clients in non-research settings, but greater self-reported symptom levels among clients in other types of clinical settings relative to clients in research settings (Villabø et al 2013). Another study reported few if any clinical differences between clients from these two settings (Solholm et al 2014).…”