Guidelines for implementing and adapting evidence-based interventions with marginalized youth in schools.

With growing diversity within the U.S. population and notable barriers to accessing behavioral health care, marginalized youth are placed at risk for developing psychosocial and mental health problems. Promoting evidence-based interventions (EBIs) through school-based mental health services may improve accessibility and quality of care for marginalized youth facing mental health disparities. Culturally sensitive interventions (CSIs) may further improve engagement with and effectiveness of EBIs with marginalized youth. In this article, we provide guidelines for advancing CSIs when implementing and adapting EBIs with marginalized youth in schools. First, we emphasize inclusive strategies for advancing CSIs with marginalized youth in schools, focusing on antiracist adaptations to interventions and using a community-based participatory research approach when implementing EBIs. Following, we discuss techniques for tailoring CSIs to more effectively support marginalized youth and their families with school-based prevention and treatment. Specifically, we recommend using the Adapting Strategies for Promoting Implementation Reach and Equity framework as a guide to promote equitable implementation as well as key strategies for engaging marginalized youth and their families with school-based EBIs. Ultimately, we offer these guidelines to address disparities and inform more equitable practice in youth mental health care-and to motivate future studies advancing culturally responsive services with marginalized youth in schools. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Mindfulness-based school interventions: A systematic review of outcome evidence quality by study design.

Objective: The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the current literature on mindfulness-based school interventions (MBSIs) by evaluating evidence across specific outcomes for youth. Methods: We evaluated 77 studies with a total sample of 12,358 students across five continents, assessing the quality of each study through a robust coding system for evidence-based guidelines. Coders rated each study numerically per study design as 1++ (RCT with a very low risk of bias) to 4 (expert opinion) and across studies for the corresponding evidence letter grade, from highest quality ('A Grade') to lowest quality ('D Grade') evidence. Results: The highest quality evidence ('A Grade') across outcomes indicated that MBSIs increased prosocial behavior, resilience, executive function, attention and mindfulness, and decreased anxiety, attention problems/ADHD behaviors and conduct behaviors. The highest quality evidence for well-being was split, with some studies showing increased well-being and some showing no improvements. The highest quality evidence suggests MBSIs have a null effect on depression symptoms. Conclusion: This review demonstrates the promise of incorporating mindfulness interventions in school settings for improving certain youth outcomes. We urge researchers interested in MBSIs to study their effectiveness using more rigorous designs (e.g., RCTs with active control groups, multi-method outcome assessment, and follow-up evaluation), to minimize bias and promote higher quality-not just increased quantity-evidence that can be relied upon to guide school-based practice.

Metrics to evaluate implementation scientists in the USA: what matters most?

BACKGROUND: Implementation science has grown rapidly as a discipline over the past two decades. An examination of how publication patterns and other scholarly activities of implementation scientists are weighted in the tenure and promotion process is needed given the unique and applied focus of the field. METHODS: We surveyed implementation scientists (mostly from the USA) to understand their perspectives on the following matters: (1) factors weighted in tenure and promotion for implementation scientists, (2) how important these factors are for success as an implementation scientist, (3) how impact is defined for implementation scientists, (4) top journals in implementation science, and (5) how these journals are perceived with regard to their prestige. We calculated univariate descriptive statistics for all quantitative data, and we used Wilcoxon signed-rank tests to compare the participants' ratings of various factors. We analyzed open-ended qualitative responses using content analysis. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-two implementation scientists completed the survey (response rate = 28.9%). Four factors were rated as more important for tenure and promotion decisions: number of publications, quality of publication outlets, success in obtaining external funding, and record of excellence in teaching. Six factors were rated as more important for overall success as an implementation scientist: presentations at professional meetings, involvement in professional service, impact of the implementation scientist's scholarship on the local community and/or state, impact of the implementation scientist's scholarship on the research community, the number and quality of the implementation scientist's community partnerships, and the implementation scientist's ability to disseminate their work to non-research audiences. Participants most frequently defined and described impact as changing practice and/or policy. This expert cohort identified Implementation Science as the top journal in the field. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there was a significant mismatch between the factors experts identified as being important to academic success (e.g., tenure and promotion) and the factors needed to be a successful implementation scientist. Findings have important implications for capacity building, although they are largely reflective of the promotion and tenure process in the USA.

The TPOCS-self-reported Therapist Intervention Fidelity for Youth (TPOCS-SeRTIFY): A case study of pragmatic measure development.

Background: Developing pragmatic assessment tools to measure clinician use of evidence-based practices is critical to advancing implementation of evidence-based practices in mental health. This case study details our community-partnered process of developing the Therapy Process Observation Coding Scale-Self-Reported Therapist Intervention Fidelity for Youth (TPOCS-SeRTIFY), a pragmatic, clinician-report instrument to measure cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) delivery. Approach: We describe a five-step community-partnered development process. Initial goals were to create a self-report instrument that paralleled an existing direct observation measure of clinician delivery of CBT use to facilitate later assessment of measure performance. Cognitive interviews with community clinicians (n = 6) and consultation with CBT experts (n = 6) were used to enhance interpretability and usability as part of an iterative refinement process. The instrument was administered to 247 community clinicians along with an established self-reported measure of clinician delivery of CBT and other treatments to assess preliminary psychometric performance. Preliminary psychometrics were promising. Conclusion: Our community-partnered development process showed promising success and can guide future development of pragmatic implementation measures both to facilitate measurement of ongoing implementation efforts and future research aimed at building learning mental health systems. Plain language summary: Developing brief, user-friendly, and accurate tools to measure how therapists deliver cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in routine practice is important for advancing the reach of CBT into community settings. To date, developing such "pragmatic" measures has been difficult. There is little known about how researchers can best develop these types of assessment tools so that they (1) are easy for clinicians in practice to use and (2) provide valid and useful information about implementation outcomes. As a result, there are few well-validated measures in existence that measure therapist use of CBT that are feasible for use in community practice. This paper contributes to the literature by describing our community-partnered process for developing a measure of therapist use of CBT (Therapy Process Observation Coding Scale -Self-Reported Therapist Intervention Fidelity for Youth; TPOCS-SeRTIFY). This descriptive case study outlines the community-partnered approach we took to develop this measure. This case study will contribute to future research by serving as a guide to others aiming to develop pragmatic implementation measures. In addition, the TPOCS-SeRTIFY is a pragmatic measure of clinician use of CBT that holds promise for its use by both researchers and clinicians to measure the success of CBT implementation efforts.