Mentalization-based treatment for children: A time-limited approach.
Abstract
This is the first comprehensive clinical introduction to using a time-limited mentalizing approach for working with children, ages 5 to 12, who experience emotional and behavioral problems, including anxiety, depression, and relational difficulties. \n \nMentalization-based treatment (MBT) promotes a child's ability to make sense of their own mind, and the minds of others around them. \n \nThe authors, an international team of clinician–researchers who are pioneering the MBT model with children, explore the significance of mentalization and describe in detail the process of conducting short-term (9–12 sessions) MBT for children, including problem assessment and case formulation in terms of mentalizing techniques, the therapist's stance, and treatment termination. \n \nThe approach draws on traditional psychodynamic principles but integrates them with findings from attachment theory, the empirical study of mentalization, and features of other evidence-based approaches. \n \nThis book includes a chapter-length case illustration and an appendix that lists measures of reflective functioning in children and their parents as well as validation articles.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
When problematic relationships in the context of COVID-19 fears call for clinical intervention, improving the capacity to represent and mentalize the internal states and interpersonal motivations of significant others may be critical for both adults and children.
“When problematic relationships in the context of the fears of COVID-19 call for a clinical intervention, improving the capacity to represent and mentalize the internal states and the interpersonal motivations of the significant others may be critical for both adults (Allen & Fonagy, 2006) and children (Midgley, Ensink, Linqvist, Malberg, & Muller, 2017).”
From The four horsemen of fear: An integrated model of understanding fear experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020) · cites this paper as Midgley, Ensink, Linqvist, Malberg, & Muller, 2017
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Schimmenti, A., Billieux, J., & Starcevic, V. (2020) · PubMed Central · doi:10.36131/cn20200202 · Cited by 313 · see citing works
Mentalization-based treatments with children and families: A systematic review of the literature
Byrne, G., Murphy, S., & Connon, G. (2020) · Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/1359104520920689 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
- Authors
- Midgley, N., Ensink, K., Lindqvist, K., Malberg, N., & Muller, N.
- Affiliations
- University College London (GB)
- Université Laval (CA)
- Yale University (US)
- Venue
- American Psychological Association eBooks
- Publisher
- American Psychological Association
- Published
- 2017
- OpenAlex
- W2606457446
- Cited by
- 111
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 11.20
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Psychological Association eBooks (publishedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
- Keywords
- mentalization-based treatment, children, time-limited therapy, mentalization, reflective functioning, emotional and behavioral problems, anxiety, depression, relationship problems, attachment theory, psychodynamic psychotherapy, therapist stance, treatment discontinuation, case formulation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review