Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37178060›Full record

ArticleEvaluation & the health professions2023

Measurement Characteristics of the Wraparound Fidelity Index Short Form: Results from a Statewide Implementation.

Brandon K Attell, Ashley C Singleton, Susan A McLaren, Giselle Moses

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evaluation & the health professions, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Brandon K AttellGeorgia Health Policy Center, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4370-3924
Ashley C SingletonNational Training and Technical Assistance Center for Child, Youth, and Family Mental Health, Center for Applied Research Solutions Inc, Santa Rosa, CA, USA.
Susan A McLarenGeorgia Health Policy Center, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Giselle MosesGeorgia Health Policy Center, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Implementation fidelity has been an important issue in the service provision and associated outcomes of Wraparound, an intensive, individualized care planning process that uses a team-based approach to integrate youth into the community to minimize the need for intensive, institutional services. In response to the growing need to monitor fidelity to the Wraparound process, a variety of instruments have been created and tested. In this study, the authors present the results of several analyses designed to better understand the measurement characteristics of the Wraparound Fidelity Index Short Form (WFI-EZ), a multi-informant fidelity instrument. The results from our analysis of 1027 WFI-EZ responses indicate that the internal consistency of the instrument is very good, although the negatively worded items did not appear to function as well as positively worded items. Results from two confirmatory factor analyses were unable to validate the original domains identified by the instrument developers, but for certain outcomes the WFI-EZ demonstrated deseriable predictive validity. Preliminary evidence is also provided that WFI-EZ responses likely differ by respondent type. We conclude by discussing the implications of using the WFI-EZ in programming, policy, and practice considering the findings of our study.

Indexed as

Community Mental Health ServicesHealth Plan ImplementationAdolescentHumansfactor analysisfidelitymeasurementpsychometricswraparoundWraparound Fidelity Index Short Form

Identifiers

PMID37178060
PMCPMC10637074

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.