ArticleEuropean child & adolescent psychiatry2025
A dyadic approach of assessing the therapeutic alliance in youth mental health and addiction treatment.
Article in European child & adolescent psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
When studying therapeutic alliance, researchers typically use data with a 'one-with-many' (OWM) nested structure in which each therapist ('one') treats several clients ('many'). The OWM structure offers the opportunity to assess the interdependence in dyadic therapeutic alliance data by disentangling three components: (1) the client's tendency to generally rate the alliance with his therapists ('client perceiver' component); (2) the client's rating of the unique alliance with his therapist ('client relationship' component); and (3) the therapist's characteristics that elicit a consistent alliance rating in his clients ('therapist partner' component). Similarly, three such components can be distinguished for the therapists' alliance ratings. We used the reciprocal OWM design to distinguish these alliance components, pertaining to the first therapeutic session of two hundred and three youths aged 13 to 23 years who entered a youth mental health and youth addiction treatment facility. We found that most of the alliance variance pertained to the relationship component (client-rated alliance: 99.2%; therapist-rated alliance: 56.0%), with virtually no evidence of therapist's characteristics that elicited a consistent (high or low) alliance rating in his clients. Clients who reported a uniquely strong alliance with their therapist were more likely to have a favorable 4-months treatment outcome (Odds ratio 1.10; p < 0.001). None of the other (client/therapist) alliance components were related to treatment outcome, nor did we find evidence of dyadic reciprocity, which would occur when a therapist would report a particularly strong alliance with the client if that client reported a particularly strong alliance with the therapist, and vice versa.
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.