Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25875325›Full record

ArticleAdministration and policy in mental health2016

Determinants and Functions of Standardized Assessment Use Among School Mental Health Clinicians: A Mixed Methods Evaluation.

Aaron R Lyon, Kristy Ludwig, Jessica Knaster Wasse, Alex Bergstrom, Ethan Hendrix, Elizabeth McCauley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Administration and policy in mental health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. A Digital Feedback System to Support Implementation of Measurement-Based Care by School-Based Mental Health Clinicians.Journal of clinical child and adolescent psychology : the official journal for the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, American Psychological Association, Division 53 · 2019
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Aaron R LyonDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, 6200 NE 74th St., Suite 100, Seattle, WA, 98115, USA. lyona@uw.edu.
Kristy LudwigDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, 6200 NE 74th St., Suite 100, Seattle, WA, 98115, USA.
Jessica Knaster WassePublic Health-Seattle and King County, Seattle, USA.
Alex BergstromDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, 6200 NE 74th St., Suite 100, Seattle, WA, 98115, USA.
Ethan HendrixDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, 6200 NE 74th St., Suite 100, Seattle, WA, 98115, USA.
Elizabeth McCauleyDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, 6200 NE 74th St., Suite 100, Seattle, WA, 98115, USA.

Funding

IMPLEMENTATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES IRI-MHSR25MH080916 · NIMH · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI Byron James Powell · 2009 to 2026
$3.7M
Implementation of a Measurement Feedback System in School Mental HealthK08MH095939 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI LYON, AARON ROBERT · 2012 to 2016
$787k
NIMH NIH HHS K08 MH095939NIMH NIH HHS R25 MH080916
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The current study evaluated why and how school mental health clinicians use standardized assessment tools in their work with youth and families. Quantitative and qualitative (focus group) data were collected prior to and following a training and consultation sequence as part of a trial program to assess school clinician's (n = 15) experiences administering standardized tools to youth on their caseloads (n = 191). Findings indicated that, although assessment use was initially somewhat low, clinicians used measures to conduct initial assessments with the bulk of their caseloads (average = 62.2%) during the implementation period. Clinicians also reported on factors influencing their use of assessments at the client, provider, and system levels; perceived functions of assessment; student responses to assessment use; and use of additional sources of clinically-relevant information (primarily educational data) for the purposes of assessment and progress monitoring. Implications for the contextual appropriateness of standardized assessment and training in assessment tools are discussed.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelCommunity Mental Health ServicesDiagnostic Techniques and ProceduresHealth PersonnelReference StandardsSchool Health ServicesAdolescentChildFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMaleQualitative ResearchStudentsAssessmentImplementationSchool mental healthTraining

Identifiers

PMID25875325
PMCPMC4500742

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.