School-based intervention for childhood disruptive behavior in disadvantaged settings: A randomized controlled trial with and without active teacher support.
Abstract
Objective In this randomized controlled trial, we investigated the effectiveness of a school-based targeted intervention program for disruptive behavior. A child-focused cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) program was introduced at schools in disadvantaged settings and with active teacher support (ATS) versus educational teacher support (ETS) (CBT + ATS vs. CBT + ETS). Method Screening (n = 1,929) and assessment (n = 224) led to the inclusion of 173 children ages 8-12 years from 17 elementary schools. Most of the children were boys (n = 136, 79%) of low or low-to-middle class socioeconomic status (87%); the sample was ethnically diverse (63% of non-Western origin). Children received CBT + ATS (n = 29) or CBT + ETS (n = 41) or were entered into a waitlist control condition (n = 103) to be treated afterward (CBT + ATS, n = 39, and CBT + ETS, n = 64). Effect sizes (ES), clinical significance (reliable change), and the results of multilevel modeling are reported. Results Ninety-seven percent of children completed treatment. Teachers and parents reported positive posttreatment effects (mean ES = .31) for CBT compared with the waitlist control condition on disruptive behavior. Multilevel modeling showed similar results. Clinical significance was modest. Changes had remained stable or had increased at 3-months follow-up (mean ES = .39). No consistent effect of teacher condition was found at posttreatment; however, at follow-up, children who received ETS fared significantly better. Co…
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?
Cognitively-oriented interventions have been found to produce positive outcomes improving self-control.
“Still other studies have found that cognitively-oriented interventions produce positive outcomes improving self-control (Augustyniak, Brooks, Rinaldo, Bogner, & Hodges, 2009;Lemberger & Clemens, 2012;Liber, De Boo, Huizenga, & Prins, 2013;Piquero et al., 2010;Stoltz et al., 2012;Wilson & Lipsey, 2006;Wilson & Lipsey, 2007).”
From Evaluating the Zones of Regulation® intervention to improve the self-control of elementary students (2020) · cites this paper as Liber, De Boo, Huizenga, & Prins, 2013
Cites
School-Based Interventions for Aggressive and Disruptive Behavior
Wilson, S. J., & Lipsey, M. W. (2007) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2007.04.011 · Cited by 783 · see citing works
School-based secondary prevention programmes for preventing violence
Mytton, J. A., DiGuiseppi, C., Gough, D., Taylor, R. S., & Logan, S. (2006) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004606.pub2 · Cited by 166 · see citing works
Placebo psychotherapy: Synonym or oxymoron?
Kirsch, I. (2005) · Journal of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1002/jclp.20126 · Cited by 164 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Evaluating the Zones of Regulation® intervention to improve the self-control of elementary students
Ochocki, S., Frey, A. J., Patterson, D. A., Herron, F., Beck, N., & Dupper, D. R. (2020) · International Journal of School Social Work · doi:10.4148/2161-4148.1046 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
- Authors
- Liber, J. M., De Boo, G. M., Huizenga, H., & Prins, P. J. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
- Published
- 2013
- Volume
- 81
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 975-987
- ISSN
- 1939-2117
- 0022-006X
- Cited by
- 14
- References
- 3
- Language
- en
- Funders
- ZonMW Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (157001016)
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