Evidence Base Update for Psychosocial Treatments for Disruptive Behaviors in Children

Abstract

This article reviews the state of the science on psychosocial treatments for disruptive behaviors in children, as an update to Eyberg, Nelson, and Boggs (2008). We followed procedures for literature searching, study inclusion, and treatment classification as laid out in Southam-Gerow and Prinstein (2014), focusing on treatments for children 12 years of age and younger. Two treatments (group parent behavior therapy, and individual parent behavior therapy with child participation) had sufficient empirical support to be classified as well-established treatments. Thirteen other treatments were classified as probably efficacious. Substantial variability in effectiveness of different programs within the same treatment family has been previously documented; thus, a particular level of evidence might not hold true for every individual program in a treatment family. Systematic investigations of implementation, dissemination, and uptake are needed to ensure that children and families have access to effective treatments. Investigations into how to blend the strengths of the effective approaches into even more effective treatment might also lead to greater impact.

Implementing evidence‐based treatment protocols: Flexibility within fidelity.

“…The decision-making process for selecting what treatment to implement is often aided by selecting the protocol with the most and strongest empirical support for the target problem. The Evidence-Base Update series (e.g., Dorsey, McLaughlin, et al, 2017; Evans, Owens, & Bunford, 2014; Freeman et al, 2014; Kaminski & Claussen, 2017) in the Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology provides disorder-specific reviews of the evidence to guide decisions about psychosocial interventions.…”

A Meta‐Analysis of Program Characteristics for Youth with Disruptive Behavior Problems: The Moderating Role of Program Format and Youth Gender

“…Theoretically, we bolster the present literature by assessing gender as a moderator of key general program characteristics that can explain the high levels of variability in DBP treatment effectiveness. This is responsive to recommendations to evaluate components of treatments as opposed to particular treatment "packages" (i.e., Kaminski & Claussen, 2017). Examining what treatment components are effective across programs has broader public health and public policy applications (Garland, Hawley, Brookman-Frazee, & Hurlburt, 2008;Kaminski & Claussen, 2017;Lipsey, Howell, Kelly, Chapman, & Carver, 2010).…”

“…This is responsive to recommendations to evaluate components of treatments as opposed to particular treatment "packages" (i.e., Kaminski & Claussen, 2017). Examining what treatment components are effective across programs has broader public health and public policy applications (Garland, Hawley, Brookman-Frazee, & Hurlburt, 2008;Kaminski & Claussen, 2017;Lipsey, Howell, Kelly, Chapman, & Carver, 2010). Treatment component evaluations allow for families to choose from a broader range of services available in their community, and providers are able to apply evidence-based treatment components rather than wait to engage in specialized training on a particular manualized protocol (Southam-Gerow & Prinstein, 2014).…”

Policy Levers to Promote Access to and Utilization of Children’s Mental Health Services: A Systematic Review

“…Evidence-based programs (i.e., interventions that have been evaluated to show positive effects on outcomes) are potentially more cost-effective than untested treatment options (Trupin and Kerns 2017). Effectively, extending the reach of evidence-based programs and evidence-informed approaches to treat children’s MBDDs has been elevated as a significant priority both for research (Aarons et al 2011; Kaminski and Claussen 2017) and policy (Barry and Huskamp 2011; Becker and Kleinman 2013; Williamson et al 2015). …”