Cited by 234Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology ResearchCounseling Practices and Supervision

Meta-analysis of the prospective relation between alliance and outcome in child and adolescent psychotherapy

Karver, Marc S., De Nadai, Alessandro S., Monahan, Maureen, Shirk, Stephen R.·2018·Psychotherapy

Abstract

In the youth treatment literature, the alliance has been defined and measured as a consensual or collaborative bond. In this article, we review varied definitions of the alliance, enumerate its frequent measures, and present clinical examples. We provide a meta-analytic review on the relation between the therapeutic alliance and treatment outcome in child and adolescent psychotherapy. In particular, this review only includes prospective studies of youth therapy that used an explicit measure of alliance. The meta-analysis of 28 studies revealed a weighted random effect size of r = .19 (k = 28, N = 2419, p < .01, 95% confidence interval [.13, .25]), which is a small to medium effect (equivalent to d = 0.39) consistent with the adult alliance literature and with prior youth meta-analyses. Given that a medium-large amount of heterogeneity was observed in effect sizes (I2 = 64.19%), theory- and method-based moderators were examined. Multiple moderators of the alliance-outcome association were found, including diagnosis class, type of therapy, study design (randomized controlled trials [RCT] vs. nonrandomized trials [non-RCT]), and treatment setting (inpatient vs. outpatient). Research limitations, patient contributions, and diversity considerations follow. The article concludes with research-informed practices for building and maintaining the therapeutic alliance with youth. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/pst0000176

Cites

93 of 93 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Karver, M. S., De Nadai, A. S., Monahan, M., & Shirk, S. R.
Affiliations
  • University of South Florida (US)
  • University of Denver (US)
Venue
Psychotherapy
Published
2018-12
Volume
55
Issue
4
Pages
341-355
ISSN
  • 0033-3204 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1536
OpenAlex
W2898018055
Cited by
234
References
92
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2
FWCI
2.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Counseling Practices and Supervision
Keywords
therapeutic relationship, child and adolescent psychotherapy, treatment outcomes, randomized controlled trials, inpatient vs outpatient treatment
MeSH terms
Therapeutic Alliance, Adolescent, Mental Disorders, Child, Cooperative Behavior, Humans, Prospective Studies, Psychotherapy, Treatment Outcome

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