| Title |
National Trainers’ Perspectives on Challenges to Implementation of an Empirically-Supported Mental Health Treatment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, April 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10488-013-0492-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rochelle F. Hanson, Kirstin Stauffacher Gros, Tatiana M. Davidson, Simone Barr, Judith Cohen, Esther Deblinger, Anthony P. Mannarino, Kenneth J. Ruggiero |
| Abstract |
This study examined perceived challenges to implementation of an empirically supported mental health treatment for youth (Trauma-Focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; TF-CBT) and explored the potential use of technology-based resources in treatment delivery. Thematic interviews were conducted with 19 approved national TF-CBT trainers to assess their perspectives about challenges to implementation of TF-CBT and to explore their perceptions about the potential value of innovative, technology-based solutions to enhance provider fidelity and improve quality of care. These data offer some important insights and implications for training in evidence-based treatments, provider fidelity and competence, and patient engagement, particularly for those interventions targeting trauma-related symptoms among youth. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 110 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 20 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 15 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 17% |
| Unknown | 20 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 47 | 42% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 7% |
| Unknown | 31 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 April 2013.
All research outputs
#14,405,036
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
#450
of 670 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,340
of 199,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
#11
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 670 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 199,538 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.