↓ Skip to main content

A Review of Technology-Based Youth and Family-Focused Interventions

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
85 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
250 Mendeley
Title
A Review of Technology-Based Youth and Family-Focused Interventions
Published in
Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, October 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10567-016-0218-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathleen Watson MacDonell, Ronald J. Prinz

Abstract

In the past 10 years, mental and behavioral health has seen a proliferation of technology-based interventions in the form of online and other computer-delivered programs. This paper focuses on technology-based treatment and preventive interventions aimed at benefitting children and adolescents via either involving the parents and families, or only the youth. The review considered only technology-based interventions that had at least one published study with a randomized controlled trial design. Questions being addressed included: (1) What are the technology-based interventions in the mental/behavioral health area that have been systematically evaluated in published studies? (2) What are the common and unique characteristics of these interventions and their application with respect to sample characteristics, target problems, and technology characteristics (platforms, structures, elements, and communication formats)? and (3) Which intervention approaches and strategies have accrued the greatest evidence? The review identified 30 technology-based psychosocial interventions for children and families, 19 of which were parent or family-focused (32 studies) and 11 of which were youth-focused (in 13 studies). For the parent/family-focused interventions, greatest promise was found in those that addressed either youth behavioral problems or depressive/anxious symptoms, as well as more general bolstering of parenting efficacy. The youth-focused interventions showed some promise in reducing depressive/anxious symptoms. Advantages and disadvantages of the technology-based approaches were considered, and areas for future research and development were discussed.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 250 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 250 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 16%
Student > Master 32 13%
Researcher 28 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 8%
Student > Bachelor 15 6%
Other 38 15%
Unknown 77 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 80 32%
Social Sciences 22 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 6%
Computer Science 11 4%
Other 14 6%
Unknown 93 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 November 2016.
All research outputs
#16,171,492
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review
#323
of 376 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#201,045
of 317,422 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 376 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.6. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 317,422 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.