Examining clinical judgment in an adaptive intervention design: The Fast Track program
Examining clinical judgment in an adaptive intervention design: The Fast Track program
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/0022-006x.74.3.468
复制
发表时间：
2006-06-01
影响因子：
5.9
通讯作者：
Murphy, Susan A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bierman, Karen L.;Nix, Robert L.;Murphy, Susan A.
虽然临床判断经常用于评估和治疗计划。很少有研究审查其可靠性，有效性，或在实践中的影响。本研究根据2种临床判断：使用标准化的多项目量表和家庭服务需求的全球评估对父母功能进行评级，定制了攻击性破坏性儿童（n = 410; 56%少数民族）预防计划中的家访频率。第一类临床判断的信度、同时效度和预测效度均优于第二类。探索性分析表明，使用父母功能的评级，以定制的治疗建议，提高了干预的影响，到三年级结束，但使用更多的全球家庭需求评估没有。
Although clinical judgment is often used in assessment and treatment planning. rarely has research examined its reliability, validity, or impact in practice settings. This study tailored the frequency of home visits in a prevention program for aggressive-disruptive children (n = 410; 56% minority) on the basis of 2 kinds of clinical judgment: ratings of parental functioning using a standardized multi-item scale and global assessments of family need for services. Stronger reliability and better concurrent and predictive validity emerged for the 1st kind of clinical judgment than for the 2nd. Exploratory analyses, suggested that using ratings of parental functioning to tailor treatment recommendations improved the impact of the intervention by the end of 3rd grade but using more global assessments of family need did not.