Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29218565›Full record

SynthesisClinical child and family psychology review2018

Alliance and Treatment Outcome in Family-Involved Treatment for Youth Problems: A Three-Level Meta-analysis.

M J Welmers-van de Poll, J J Roest, T van der Stouwe, A L van den Akker, G J J M Stams, V Escudero, G J Overbeek, J J W de Swart

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical child and family psychology review, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Mandated Parent Education: Applications, Impacts, and Future Directions.Clinical child and family psychology review · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

8 authors.

M J Welmers-van de PollResearch Centre Youth Care, Windesheim University of Applied Sciences, Postbus 10090, 8000 GB, Zwolle, The Netherlands. mariannevdpoll@hotmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-6091-8807
J J RoestYouth Expert Centre, Leiden University of Applied Sciences, Zernikedreef 11, Postbus 382, 2300 AJ, Leiden, The Netherlands.
T van der StouweChild and Youth Care Sciences, University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 127, 1018 WS, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
A L van den AkkerChild and Youth Care Sciences, University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 127, 1018 WS, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
G J J M StamsChild and Youth Care Sciences, University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 127, 1018 WS, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
V EscuderoDepartment of Psychology, University of A Coruña, Elviña, 15071, A Coruña, Spain.
G J OverbeekChild and Youth Care Sciences, University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 127, 1018 WS, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J J W de SwartResearch Group Social Work, Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Postbus 70.000, 7500 KB, Enschede, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Alliance has been shown to predict treatment outcome in family-involved treatment for youth problems in several studies. However, meta-analytic research on alliance in family-involved treatment is scarce, and to date, no meta-analytic study on the alliance-outcome association in this field has paid attention to moderating variables. We included 28 studies reporting on the alliance-outcome association in 21 independent study samples of families receiving family-involved treatment for youth problems (N = 2126 families, M age youth ranging from 10.6 to 16.1). We performed three multilevel meta-analyses of the associations between three types of alliance processes and treatment outcome, and of several moderator variables. The quality of the alliance was significantly associated with treatment outcome (r = .183, p < .001). Correlations were significantly stronger when alliance scores of different measurement moments were averaged or added, when families were help-seeking rather than receiving mandated care and when studies included younger children. The correlation between alliance improvement and treatment outcome just failed to reached significance (r = .281, p = .067), and no significant correlation was found between split alliances and treatment outcome (r = .106, p = .343). However, the number of included studies reporting on alliance change scores or split alliances was small. Our findings demonstrate that alliance plays a small but significant role in the effectiveness of family-involved treatment. Future research should focus on investigating the more complex systemic aspects of alliance to gain fuller understanding of the dynamic role of alliance in working with families.

Indexed as

Therapeutic AllianceAdolescentChildChild Behavior DisordersFamily TherapyHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareFamily-based treatmentMultilevel meta-analysisTherapeutic allianceTreatment outcomesWorking alliance

Identifiers

PMID29218565
PMCPMC5899120

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.