↓ Skip to main content

Multisystemic Therapy and Functional Family Therapy Compared on their Effectiveness Using the Propensity Score Method

Overview of attention for article published in Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
Title
Multisystemic Therapy and Functional Family Therapy Compared on their Effectiveness Using the Propensity Score Method
Published in
Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10802-017-0392-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hester V. Eeren, Lucas M. A. Goossens, Ron H. J. Scholte, Jan J. V. Busschbach, Rachel E. A. van der Rijken

Abstract

Multisystemic Therapy (MST) and Functional Family Therapy (FFT) have overlapping target populations and treatment goals. In this study, these interventions were compared on their effectiveness using a quasi-experimental design. Between October, 2009 and June, 2014, outcome data were collected from 697 adolescents (mean age 15.3 (SD 1.48), 61.9% male) assigned to either MST or FFT (422 MST; 275 FFT). Data were gathered during Routine Outcome Monitoring. The primary outcome was externalizing problem behavior (Child Behavior Checklist and Youth Self Report). Secondary outcomes were the proportion of adolescents living at home, engaged in school or work, and who lacked police contact during treatment. Because of the non-random assignment, a propensity score method was used to control for observed pre-treatment differences. Because the risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model guided treatment assignment, effectiveness was also estimated in youth with and without a court order as an indicator of their risk level. Looking at the whole sample, no difference in effect was found with regard to externalizing problems. For adolescents without a court order, effects on externalizing problems were larger after MST. Because many more adolescents with a court order were assigned to MST compared to FFT, the propensity score method could not balance the treatment groups in this subsample. In conclusion, few differences between MST and FFT were found. In line with the RNR model, higher risk adolescents were assigned to the more intensive treatment, namely MST. In the group with lower risk adolescents, this more intensive treatment was more effective in reducing externalizing problems.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 86 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 17%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 9%
Researcher 5 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 6%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 34 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 26 30%
Social Sciences 8 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Unspecified 2 2%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 38 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 August 2020.
All research outputs
#3,276,002
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology
#317
of 2,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,473
of 450,867 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology
#9
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,047 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
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 450,867 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.