Parenting Matters Supporting Parents of Children Ages 0-8 (2016) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Appendix B: Clearinghouses Used to Identify Interventions with Evidence of Effectiveness
Appendix B: Clearinghouses Used to Identify Interventions with Evidence of Effectiveness
Pages 401-412
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 401... ...
NREPP's registry and review system was established to provide information to the public about evidence-based programs and practices that are available for implementation. NREPP's registry, run by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)
|
From page 402... ...
The intervention's research or evaluation must either measure m ental health or substance abuse outcomes or behavioral health related outcomes for those with or at risk of mental health issues or substance use problems.
|
From page 403... ...
Eligible outcomes presently include mental health, substance abuse, and wellness. Next, an expert review performed by two certified reviewers measures the rigor of the study and the impact on outcomes.
|
From page 404... ...
. The evidence classes are as follows: • Class A: highest-quality evidence with confidence interval com pletely within the favorable range • Class B: sufficient evidence with confidence interval completely within the favorable range • Class C: sufficient or highest-quality evidence with confidence in terval spanning both the favorable and trivial ranges • Class D: sufficient or highest-quality evidence with confidence in terval completely within the trivial range • Class E: sufficient or highest-quality evidence with confidence in terval spanning both the harmful and trivial ranges • Class F: sufficient or highest-quality evidence with confidence inter val completely within the harmful range • Class G: limitations in the study design preclude reporting further on the outcome
|
From page 405... ...
The outcome scores are calculated from the evidence classes of each component measure, and the rating of the conceptual framework is a determination of whether a program has clear goals, activities, and a theory of change. The possible outcome ratings are • Effective: strong evidence of a favorable effect • Promising: sufficient evidence of a favorable effect • Ineffective: sufficient evidence of a negligible effect OR sufficient evidence of a possibly harmful effect • Inconclusive: study design limitations or a lack of effect size infor mation precludes reporting further on the effect BLUEPRINTS FOR HEALTHY YOUTH DEVELOPMENT2 Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development is a registry of evidencebased programs for positive youth development created by the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence at the University of Colorado Boulder.
|
From page 406... ...
There must be • Evidence of a consistent and statistically significant positive impact on a Blue prints outcome in a preponderance of studies that meet the Evaluation Quality criteria above • absence of iatrogenic effects for intervention participants, including all An subgroups and Blueprints outcomes 3. Intervention Specificity: The program identifies intended program outcomes, risks and protective factors linked to this change in outcome, target population
|
From page 407... ...
This includes materials specifying in detail what the intervention comprises; levels of formal training or qualifications for those delivering the intervention; and typically includes training and technical assistance • specifications on the financial resources required to deliver the intervention including a description of costs associated with implementing the program (start-up costs; intervention implementation costs; intervention implementation support costs, costs associated with fidelity monitoring and evaluation)
|
From page 408... ...
Promising Programs Promising programs meet the four criteria elaborated in Box B-3 and are recommended for local community and system adoption. Promising programs do not have to meet the additional evaluation quality and intervention impact requirements for Model programs listed above.
|
From page 409... ...
The CEBC review process starts with the selection of topic areas, which is performed annually by an advisory committee. A list of possible programs to be included in each topic area is then generated based on information from topic experts and literature searches conducted by staff.
|
From page 410... ...
Program representatives also can submit new published, peerreviewed studies to initiate the re-review process at any time. Child Welfare System Relevance Levels In addition to its assigned rating, each program included in the database is reviewed to determine how child outcomes are addressed in the program's research evidence.
|
From page 411... ...
• The practice has a book, manual, and/or other available writings that specify components of the service and describe how to administer it. 2 = Supported by Research Evidence • minimum of one rigorous randomized controlled trials (RCTs)
|
From page 412... ...
• The practice has a book, manual, and/or other available writings that specify components of the service and describe how to administer it. 5 = Concerning Practice • multiple outcome studies have been conducted, the total weight of evidence If suggests the intervention has a negative effect upon clients served; and/or there are data suggesting a risk of harm that (a)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.