ArticleJournal of child sexual abuse2022
Implementation of A Care Process Model for Pediatric Traumatic Stress in Child Advocacy Centers: A Mixed Methods Study.
Article in Journal of child sexual abuse, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Screening for and Responding to Suicidality Among Youth Presenting to a Children's Advocacy Center (CAC).Child maltreatment · 2024Article
- Team-focused implementation strategies to improve implementation of mental health screening and referral in rural Children's Advocacy Centers: study protocol for a pilot cluster randomized hybrid type 2 trial.Implementation science communications · 2023Article
- Associations between teamwork and implementation outcomes in multidisciplinary cross-sector teams implementing a mental health screening and referral protocol.Implementation science communications · 2023Article
- Traumatic stress symptoms and PTSD risk in children served by Children's Advocacy Centers.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Child Advocacy Centers (CACs) are well-positioned to identify children with mental health needs and facilitate access to evidence-based treatment. However, use of evidence-based screening tools and referral protocols varies across CACs. Understanding barriers and facilitators can inform efforts to implement mental health screening and referral protocols in CACs. We describe statewide efforts implementing a standardized screening and referral protocol, the Care Process Model for Pediatric Traumatic Stress (CPM-PTS), in CACs. Twenty-three CACs were invited to implement the CPM-PTS. We used mixed methods to evaluate the first two years of implementation. We quantitatively assessed adoption, reach, and acceptability; qualitatively assessed facilitators and barriers; and integrated quantitative and qualitative data to understand implementation of mental health screening in CACs. Eighteen CACs adopted the CPM-PTS. Across CACs, screening rates ranged from 10% to 100%. Caregiver ratings indicated high acceptability. Facilitators and barriers were identified within domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Qualitative findings provided insight into adoption, reach, and caregivers' responses. Our findings suggest screening for traumatic stress and suicidality in CACs is valued, acceptable, and feasible. Implementation of mental health screening and referral protocols in CACs may improve identification of children with mental health needs and support treatment engagement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.