CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 5Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationChild Welfare and AdoptionDigital Mental Health Interventions

An Ecodevelopmental Framework for Engaging Diverse Youth in Foster Care and Their Families Into Technology-Based Family Intervention Research Trials

Open access
Folk, Johanna B., Gill, Heman, Ordorica, Catalina, Rodriguez, Christopher A., Holloway, Evan D., Meza, Jocelyn, Tolou-Shams, Marina·2022·Frontiers in Digital Health
DOI 10.3389/fdgth.2022.866139PMC PMC9135973
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Family-based interventions delivered via telehealth are a promising mode for overcoming barriers to behavioral health treatment among youth in foster care and their families. There is a dearth of research, however, regarding effectiveness of these interventions for youth in foster care, who commonly exhibit complex behavioral health treatment needs. Clinical research in this area directly relates to equity in service access and quality for these youth and families, with numerous barriers and enabling factors to consider in order to improve engagement in clinical trials and bolster the evidence base. We present a framework to better understand the multi-systemic factors impacting youth and family engagement in clinical research on family-based telehealth interventions, drawing on relevant theory, including the bioecological model and ecodevelopmental theory. We also draw on our experiences conducting technology-based clinical research through the Family Telehealth Project, an evaluation of a brief family-based affect management intervention designed specifically for youth in foster care and their families, as a case example. Recommendations for promoting engagement in clinical research on family-based telehealth interventions with diverse youth in foster care and their families are provided.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fdgth.2022.866139

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • In-person family-based interventions with caregivers of origin are typically not feasible for adolescent foster youth placed out of county.

    “for whom in-person family-based interventions with caregivers of origin are typically not feasible [18].”

    From Implementation Considerations for Family-Based Telehealth Interventions for Youth in Foster Care: Focus Group Study With Child Welfare System Professionals (2023) · cites this paper as [18]

    The Introduction (page not provided) says geographical distance between foster youth and their families of origin can impede participation in family-based interventions. It does not specifically address out-of-county placements or say that in-person interventions are typically not feasible; the claim makes the barrier more categorical than the source does. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 32 · Cited by 5

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. [3]Wildeman C Emanuel N. Cumulative risks of foster care placement by age 18 for U.S. Children, 2000–2011. PLoS ONE. 9: e92785. 10.1371/journal.pone.0092785 24671254 PMC3966831 · DOI
  2. [4]Stephens TN. Distinguishing racism, not race, as a risk factor for child welfare involvement: reclaiming the familial and cultural strengths in the lived experiences of child welfare-affected parents of color. Geneaology. (2021) 5: 1– 7. 10.3390/genealogy5010011 · DOI
  3. [6]Leve LD Fisher PA Chamberlain P. Multidimensional treatment foster care as a preventive intervention to promote resiliency among youth in the child welfare system. J Pers. (2009) 77: 1869– 902. 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2009.00603.x 19807861 PMC2787781 · DOI · Paper page
  4. [8]Wrape ER McGinn MM. Clinical and ethical considerations for delivering couple and family therapy via telehealth. J Marital Fam Ther. (2019) 45: 296– 308. 10.1016/j.childyouth.2010.01.006 29361194 · DOI
  5. [9]Loria H McLeigh J Wolfe K Conner E Smith V Greeley CS. Caring for children in foster and kinship care during a pandemic: lessons learned and recommendations. J Public Child Welf. (2021) 1– 24. 10.1080/15548732.2021.1965065 · DOI
  6. [11]Backhaus A Agha Z Maglione ML Repp A Ross B Zuest D. Videoconferencing psychotherapy: a systematic review. Psychol Serv. (2012) 9: 111– 31. 10.1037/a0027924 22662727 · DOI · Paper page
  7. [12]Richards D Viganó N. Online counseling: a narrative and critical review of the literature. J Clin Psychol. (2013) 69: 994– 1011. 10.1002/jclp.21974 23630010 · DOI
  8. [13]Badillo-Urquiola K Harpin S Wisniewski P. Abandoned but not forgotten: Providing access while protecting foster youth from online risks. In: Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Interaction Design and Children. Stanford, CA (2017). p. 17– 26.
  9. [15]Finn J Kerman B LeCornec J. Building skills–building futures: providing information technology to foster families. Fam Soc J Contemp Soc Serv. (2004) 85: 165– 76. 10.1606/1044-3894.317 · DOI
  10. [16]Bronfenbrenner U Morris P. The ecology of the development process. In: Damon W Lerner RM editors. Handbook of Child Psychology. New York: Wiley (1998). p. 993– 1028.
  11. [19]Toros K DiNitto DM Tiko A. Family engagement in the child welfare system: a scoping review. Child Youth Serv Rev. (2018) 88: 598– 607. 10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.03.011 · DOI
  12. [20]Fong K. Neighborhood Inequality in the prevalence of reported and substantiated maltreatment. Child Abuse Negl. (2019) 90: 13– 21. 10.1016/j.chiabu.2019.01.014 30716651 · DOI
  13. [21]Hill RB. Institutional racism in child welfare. Race Soc. (2004) 7: 17– 33. 10.1016/j.racsoc.2004.11.004 · DOI
  14. [22]Eckenrode J Smith EG Mccarthy ME Dineen M. Income inequality and child maltreatment in the United States. Pediatrics. (2014) 133: 454– 61. 10.1542/peds.2013-1707 24515511 · DOI
  15. [23]Lindsey D. Factors affecting the foster care placement decision: an analysis of national survey data. Am J Orthopsychiatry. (1991) 61: 272– 81. 10.1037/h0085011 2048642 · DOI
  16. [25]Jaiswal J. Whose responsibility is it to dismantle medical mistrust? Future directions for researchers and health care providers. Behav Med. (2019) 45: 188– 96. 10.1080/08964289.2019.1630357 31343959 PMC7808309 · DOI
  17. [26]Scharf DP Mathews KJ Jackson P Hofsuemmer J Martin E Edwards D. More than Tuskegee: Understanding mistrust about research participation. J Health Care Poor Underserved. (2010) 21: 879– 97. 10.1353/hpu.0.0323 20693733 PMC4354806 · DOI
  18. [27]Najdowski CJ Bernstein KM. Race, social class, and child abuse: Content and strength of medical professionals' stereotypes. Child Abus Negl. (2018) 86: 217– 22. 10.1016/j.chiabu.2018.10.006 30359821 · DOI
  19. [28]Hirsch RA Dierkhising CB Herz DC. Educational risk, recidivism, and service access among youth involved in both the child welfare and juvenile justice systems. Child Youth Serv Rev. (2018) 85: 72– 80. 10.1016/j.childyouth.2017.12.001 · DOI
  20. [29]Vidal S Prince D Connell CM Caron CM Kaufman JS Tebes JK. Child abuse & neglect maltreatment, family environment, and social risk factors: determinants of the child welfare to juvenile justice transition among maltreated children and adolescents. Child Abuse Negl. (2017) 63: 7– 18. 10.1016/j.chiabu.2016.11.013 27886518 PMC5283859 · DOI
  21. [30]Curfman A McSwain SD Chuo J Yeager-McSwain B Schinasi DA Marcin J. Pediatric telehealth in the COVID-19 pandemic era and beyond. Pediatrics. (2021) 148: e2020047795. 10.1542/peds.2020-047795 34215677 PMC8669573 · DOI
  22. [31]Tolou-Shams M Dauria E Conrad SM Kemp K Johnson S Brown LK. Outcomes of a family-based HIV prevention intervention for substance using juvenile offenders. J Subst Abuse Treat. (2017) 77: 115– 25. 10.1016/j.jsat.2017.03.013 28476263 PMC5769453 · DOI
  23. [32]Donenberg GR Pao M. Youths and HIV/AIDS: psychiatry's role in a changing epidemic. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. (2005) 44: 728– 47. 10.1097/01.chi.0000166381.68392.02 16034275 PMC1634829 · DOI
  24. [33]Donenberg G Emerson E Kendall AD. HIV-risk reduction intervention for juvenile offenders on probation: The PHAT Life group randomized controlled trial. Heal Psychol. (2018) 37: 364– 74. 10.1037/hea0000582 29389155 PMC5880687 · DOI
  25. [34]Brown LK Hadley W Donenberg GR DiClemente RJ Lescano C Lang DM. Project STYLE: a multisite RCT for HIV prevention among youths in mental health treatment. Psychiatr Serv. (2014) 65: 338– 44. 10.1176/appi.ps.201300095 24382603 PMC9215702 · DOI

Authors
Folk, J. B., Gill, H., Ordorica, C., Rodriguez, C. A., Holloway, E. D., Meza, J., & Tolou-Shams, M.
Affiliations
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Corresponding author
Folk, Johanna B.
ORCID
Venue
Frontiers in Digital Health
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2022-05-13
Volume
4
Pages
866139-866139
ISSN
2673-253X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/fdgth.2022.866139
PMC
PMC9135973
OpenAlex
W4280542130
Cited by
5
References
32
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1
FWCI
1.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Frontiers in Digital Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Visa
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (K23DA050798, K24DA046569, T32DA007250)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (T32MH018261)
  • American Psychological Association
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Child Welfare and Adoption
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
foster youth, research engagement, clinical trial participation, bioecological model, behavioral health treatment

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