A Mixed Methods Examination of Session Planning Among Public Mental Health Therapists.

Session planning is a core activity for implementing evidence-based practices (EBPs), yet it is unknown whether public mental health settings provide the support for therapists to session plan. This two-part study conducted in collaboration with EBP leaders in Philadelphia's public mental health system deployed mixed methods to examine therapists' session planning practices and preferences. In Study 1, 61 public mental health therapists completed an online survey to identify session planning barriers and facilitators, current practices, and desired planning supports. In Study 2, nine therapists who ranked a session planning tool as a top choice support in Study 1 participated in two focus groups to elaborate on their survey responses and provide feedback on three session planning tool prototypes. Study 1 survey respondents cited multi-level barriers and facilitators to session planning. In both closed- and open-ended responses, analyzed descriptively and via content analysis respectively, therapists described wanting more time, lower caseloads, financial incentives for session planning, and additional clinical resources and guidance from trainings, peers, and supervisors to support session planning. Study 2 focus group participants, whose responses were analyzed using content analysis, reiterated the need for these multi-level supports and expressed the need for a "one-stop" database of session planning tools that would be free, easily searchable, and modifiable for varied clinical needs. All three session planning tool prototypes reviewed were acceptable; two were also considered feasible and appropriate. This investigation of an under-studied aspect of the EBP implementation process reveals the need for multi-level session planning supports.

Slipping Through the Cracks: Clinicians' Perspectives on the Gaps in New York City's Public Mental Health System.

Most people who seek mental health treatment cannot access it. Certain groups (e.g., Medicaid enrollees and the uninsured) face particularly severe treatment access barriers along the care continuum. We interviewed 31 clinicians across two studies about their perspectives working in New York City's public mental health system. Because every clinician across both studies reported gaps in the system, we deployed an emergent, "serendipitous finding" approach and qualitatively analyzed the interviews together. Clinicians described three public mental health system gaps. First, many treatment-seekers must wait long periods of time to receive care and some never receive it at all. Second, patients with more serious challenges cannot access longer-term, higher-intensity, or specialized treatment. Third, some patients receiving high-intensity services may benefit from lower-intensity mental health support that is better integrated with medical and social service support. Coordinated and sustained financial investments at every step of the mental healthcare continuum are needed.

A critical review of clinician-directed nudges.

As nudges-subtle changes to the way options are presented to guide choice-have gained popularity across policy domains in the past 15 years, healthcare systems and researchers have eagerly deployed these light-touch interventions to improve clinical decision-making. However, recent research has identified the limitations of nudges. Although nudges may modestly improve clinical decisions in some contexts, these interventions (particularly nudges implemented as electronic health record alerts) can also backfire and have unintended consequences. Further, emerging research on crowd-out effects suggests that healthcare nudges may direct attention and resources toward the clinical encounter and away from the main structural drivers of poor health outcomes. It is time to move beyond nudges and toward the development of multi-level, structurally focused interventions.

Policy Recommendations for Coordinated and Sustainable Growth of the Behavioral Health Workforce.

Policy Points Demand for behavioral health services outpaces the capacity of the existing workforce, and the unmet need for behavioral health services is expected to grow. This paper summarizes research and policy evidence demonstrating that the long-standing challenges that impede behavioral health workforce development and retention (i.e., low wages, high workloads, training gaps) are being replicated by growing efforts to expand the workforce through task-sharing delivery to nonspecialist behavioral health providers (e.g., peer specialists, promotores de salud). In this paper, we describe policy opportunities to sustain behavioral health workforce growth to meet demand while supporting fair wages, labor protections, and rigorous training.

Church Against State: How Industry Groups Lead the Religious Liberty Assault on Civil Rights, Healthcare Policy, and the Administrative State.

Industry-funded religious liberty legal groups have sought to undermine healthcare policy and law while simultaneously attacking the rights of sexual and gender minorities. Whereas past scholarship has tracked religiously-affiliated healthcare providers' growing political power and attendant transformations to legal doctrine, our account emphasizes the political donors and visionaries who have leveraged religious providers and the U.S. healthcare system's delegated structure to transform social policy and bureaucratic agencies more generally.

From plan to practice: A qualitative study of public mental health therapists' session-planning practices.

Therapists must dedicate considerable time to session plan to implement evidence-based practices (EBPs) flexibly and with fidelity. It is unclear whether public mental health settings offer the structural and organizational support for therapists to engage in session planning and, therefore, whether they provide the necessary infrastructure for EBP implementation. In Fall 2022, 18 therapists working in public mental health settings in New York City were recruited through snowball sampling to participate in 90-min semistructured qualitative interviews. Therapists were prompted to review their session-planning practices using a chart-stimulated recall strategy; to describe structural, organizational, and individual barriers and facilitators to session planning; and to generate recommendations to support their session planning. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis. A diverse group of therapists participated in the study-22% identified as Black; 22% as Asian; and 11% as Hispanic/Latinx. Seventy-eight percent of therapists were social workers; and they had on average 6.18 (SD = 5.70) years of clinical experience. The research team identified four multilevel session-planning barriers and three multilevel session-planning facilitators. Therapists proposed seven multilevel recommendations to support their session planning. Overall, therapists indicated that managing high productivity standards, severe clinical presentations, and clients' social needs often prevent them from having time to plan for sessions. Efforts to implement EBPs in public mental health settings cannot neglect the structural realities faced by agencies, therapists, and clients. Multilevel resources and reforms to support therapists' session planning are necessary. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Agents of scientific uncertainty: Conflicts over evidence and expertise in gender-affirming care bans for minors.

Globally, as medical and mental health associations increasingly have expressed support for the gender-affirming care model for trans and gender expansive youth, this model has been paradoxically banned across the United States. Ban proponents have deemed the science behind gender-affirming care to be dangerously uncertain. Examining the first gender-affirming care ban for minors, Arkansas's Save Adolescents from Experimentation (SAFE) Act of 2021, we addressed the following two questions: 1) who are the scientists, clinicians, and political organizations that promote SAFE and similar bans?; and 2) what are the scientific arguments they make to defend SAFE in federal court? First, we developed a typology of the various "agents of scientific uncertainty" behind these bans, drawing on literature from the sociology and history of science and medicine as well as the political economy of scientific doubt. Second, we created and qualitatively analyzed a dataset featuring 375 unique citations referenced throughout federal litigation over SAFE to identify these agents of scientific uncertainty's arguments. We sorted these arguments into eight categories, which reveal how agents distorted scientific evidence and exaggerated real uncertainties and risks in gender-affirming care. This case study establishes a frame for understanding the growing prevalence and legal impact of scientific arguments against gender-affirming care.

Impact of U.S. Federal Loan Repayment Programs on the Behavioral Health Workforce: Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: Federal loan repayment programs (LRPs) are one strategy to address the shortage of behavioral health providers. This scoping review aimed to identify and characterize the federal LRPs' impact on the U.S. behavioral health workforce. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted in accordance with JBI (formerly known as the Joanna Briggs Institute) methodology for scoping reviews. The authors searched the Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, APA PsycInfo, EconLit, PAIS Index, and Embase databases, and gray literature was also reviewed. Two coders screened each article's abstract and full text and extracted study data. Findings were narratively synthesized and conceptually organized. RESULTS: The full-text screening identified 17 articles that met eligibility criteria. Of these, eight were peer-reviewed studies, and all but one evaluated the National Health Service Corps (NHSC) LRP. Findings were conceptually organized into five categories: descriptive studies of NHSC behavioral health needs and the NHSC workforce (k=4); providers' perceptions of, and experiences with, the NHSC (k=2); associations between NHSC funding and the number of NHSC behavioral health providers (k=4); NHSC behavioral health workforce productivity and capacity (k=3); and federal LRP recruitment and retention (k=4). CONCLUSIONS: The literature on federal LRPs and their impact on the behavioral health workforce is relatively limited. Although federal LRPs are an important and effective tool to address the behavioral health workforce shortage, additional federal policy strategies are needed to attract and retain behavioral health providers and to diversify the behavioral health workforce.

Implementing trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy in Philadelphia: A 10-year evaluation.

Background: In 2012, Philadelphia's Department of Behavioral Health and Intellectual disAbility Services (DBHIDS) developed an initiative to implement an evidence-based treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy (TF-CBT), across the city's behavioral health system. This report evaluates the initiative's 10-year implementation and effectiveness outcomes. Method: The Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment framework guided our implementation evaluation. The implementation outcomes include adoption, reach, and sustainment; these were obtained during regular evaluation data collection from publicly funded behavioral health agencies participating in the TF-CBT initiative. We analyze effectiveness outcomes (i.e., changes in PTSD symptoms) from a subset of patients receiving TF-CBT, which were collected in 6-month intervals by our research team between 2013 and 2021. Results: From 2012 to 2021, DBHIDS trained 478 clinicians in TF-CBT across 20 behavioral health agencies. During this time, 23,401 youths were screened for potentially traumatic events and PTSD symptoms, and 7,550 youths received TF-CBT. Through the TF-CBT initiative, the city expanded the network of TF-CBT providers from 3 to 20 agencies. DBHIDS sustained this network by maintaining the participation of 16 behavioral health agencies over the course of a decade. The subset of 202 youths who were evaluated to assess TF-CBT effectiveness was drawn from 94 therapists and 20 agencies across Philadelphia. All participating youths completed a baseline assessment, and 151 (75%) completed at least one follow-up assessment. Linear mixed-effects models accounting for observations nested within participants and nested within clinicians found that treatment significantly reduced PTSD symptoms. Conclusion: Between 2012 and 2021, DBHIDS successfully implemented and sustained TF-CBT across the city's behavioral health system. Adoption, reach, and sustainment of TF-CBT were high. Despite the considerable adverse experiences faced by youths seeking treatment in Philadelphia's behavioral health system, TF-CBT was effective. Future directions to improve TF-CBT implementation in the next iteration of the initiative are described.

This practical implementation report describes a 10-year effort by the city of Philadelphia to develop a trauma-informed behavioral health system, making this report one of the longest evaluations of an implementation initiative in a large metropolitan area in the United States. In particular, the report describes the implementation and effectiveness outcomes of Philadelphia's Department of Behavioral Health and Intellectual disAbility Services (DBHIDS)'s implementation of the evidence-based treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy (TF-CBT), across the city's behavioral health agencies. From 2012 to 2021, DBHIDS trained 478 clinicians in TF-CBT across 20 behavioral health agencies. During this time, 23,401 youths were screened for posttraumatic stress symptoms, and 7,550 youths received TF-CBT. A subset of 202 youths receiving TF-CBT from 94 therapists across 20 Philadelphia agencies were evaluated to assess the initiative's effectiveness. Linear mixed-effects models revealed that youths receiving TF-CBT from DBHIDS-trained clinicians saw their PTSD symptoms significantly reduce. The initiative's success in adoption, reach, sustainment, and effectiveness reveals the promise of sustained, multipronged, community-partnered implementation initiatives. In the future, researchers and policymakers must account for and address the structural and financial barriers that hinder these community-partnered implementation efforts from realizing their full potential in improving population health.

Community Mental Health Clinicians' Perspectives on Telehealth During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: In March 2020, a rapid shift to telehealth occurred in community mental health settings in response to the need for physical distancing to decrease transmission of the virus causing COVID-19. Whereas treatment delivered over telehealth was previously utilized sparingly in community settings, it quickly became the primary mode of treatment delivery for the vast majority of clinicians, many of whom had little time to prepare for this shift and limited to no experience using telehealth. Little is known about community mental health clinicians' experiences using telehealth. Although telehealth may make mental health treatment more accessible for some clients, it may create additional barriers for others given the high rates of poverty among individuals seeking treatment from community mental health centers. OBJECTIVE: We examined community mental health clinicians' perspectives on using telehealth to deliver trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy to youth. We sought to better understand the acceptability of using telehealth, as well as barriers and facilitators to usage. METHODS: We surveyed 45 clinicians across 15 community clinics in Philadelphia. Clinicians rated their satisfaction with telehealth using a quantitative scale and shared their perspectives on telehealth in response to open-ended questions. Therapists' responses were coded using an open-coding approach wherein coders generated domains, themes, and subthemes. RESULTS: Clinicians rated telehealth relatively positively on the quantitative survey, expressing overall satisfaction with their current use of telehealth during the pandemic, and endorsing telehealth as a helpful mode of connecting with clients. Responses to open-ended questions fell into five domains. Clinicians noted that (1) telehealth affects the content (ie, what is discussed) and process (ie, how it is discussed) of therapy; (2) telehealth alters engagement, retention, and attendance; (3) technology is a crucial component of utilizing telehealth; (4) training, resources, and support are needed to facilitate telehealth usage; and (5) the barriers, facilitators, and level of acceptability of telehealth differ across individual clinicians and clients. CONCLUSIONS: First, telehealth is likely a better fit for some clients and clinicians than others, and attention should be given to better understanding who is most likely to succeed using this modality. Second, although telehealth increased convenience and accessibility of treatment, clinicians noted that across the board, it was difficult to engage clients (eg, young clients were easily distracted), and further work is needed to identify better telehealth engagement strategies. Third, for many clients, the telehealth modality may actually create an additional barrier to care, as children from families living in poverty may not have the requisite devices or quality broadband connection to make telehealth workable. Better strategies to address disparities in access to and quality of digital technologies are needed to render telehealth an equitable option for all youth seeking mental health services.

Economic Precarity, Financial Strain, and Job-Related Stress Among Philadelphia's Public Mental Health Clinicians.

OBJECTIVE: Efforts to improve mental health treatment delivery come at a time of rising inequality and cuts or insufficient increases to mental health funding. Public mental health clinicians face increased demands, experience economic stress, and treat underresourced patients disproportionately burdened by trauma. The authors sought to understand clinicians' current economic and psychological conditions and the relationship of these conditions to the delivery of an evidence-based intervention (EBI) designed to treat posttraumatic stress disorder among youths. METHODS: In July 2020, 49 public mental health clinicians from 16 Philadelphia clinics who were trained in an EBI, trauma-focused cognitive-behavioral therapy (TF-CBT), were surveyed by e-mail. Respondents reported on their economic precarity, financial strain, burnout, secondary traumatic stress (i.e., the stress response associated with caring for people exposed to trauma), and TF-CBT use. Associations between clinicians' job-related stressors and their use of TF-CBT were examined with mixed models. Content coding was used to organize clinicians' open-ended responses to questions regarding financial strain related to the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Clinicians' economic precarity, financial strain, and job-related stress were high; 37% of clinicians were independent contractors, 44% of whom wanted a salaried position. Of 37 clinicians with education debt, 38% reported owing ≥$100,000. In the past year, 29% of clinicians reported lack of personal mental health care because of cost, and 22% met the cutoff for experiencing secondary traumatic stress symptoms. Education debt was negatively associated with use of TF-CBT (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The stress of providing care in underresourced clinical settings may interfere with efforts to integrate scientific evidence into mental health care.

Understanding therapists' perceived determinants of trauma narrative use.

BACKGROUND: Trauma narratives are a critical, exposure-based component of trauma-focused cognitive-behavioral therapy, yet community therapists rarely use them. Given evidence that intentions to deliver elements of cognitive behavioral therapy vary by component, and that intentions to deliver exposure are the weakest, this study focused specifically on trauma narratives. We drew on a social psychology causal theory (Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB)) and an implementation science framework (the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR)) to glean insight into multilevel influences on trauma narrative use. While the CFIR offers a broad list of factors potentially affecting implementation, the TPB offers causal pathways between individual-level constructs that predict behavior, including the uptake of an evidence-based intervention. The integration of these approaches may provide a more complete understanding of factors affecting therapists' use of TNs. METHODS: Therapists (n=65) trained in trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy completed a survey about their use of and beliefs about trauma narratives. Content analysis was used to identify common beliefs about trauma narratives. A subset of participants (n=17) completed follow-up qualitative interviews, which were analyzed using an integrated approach informed by the CFIR. RESULTS: While most participants reported high intentions to use TNs, nearly half reported that they did not use TNs in the last 6 months. Survey data indicate a number of TPB-related determinants related to using trauma narratives. Qualitative interviews identified CFIR-relevant contextual factors that may influence constructs central to TPB. CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight the importance of integrating approaches that address multiple theoretical determinants of therapist behavior, including therapist, organizational, and client factors with causal explanations to explain implementation behavior.

A pilot study of participatory and rapid implementation approaches to increase depression screening in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Most individuals with depression go unidentified and untreated. In 2016 the US Preventive Services Task Force released guidelines recommending universal screening in primary care to identify patients with depression and to link them to treatment. Feasible, acceptable, and effective strategies to implement these guidelines are needed. METHODS: This three-phased study employed rapid participatory methods to design and test strategies to increase depression screening at Penn Medicine, a large health system with 90 primary care practices. First, researchers solicited ideas and barriers from stakeholders to increase screening using an innovation tournament-a crowdsourcing method that invites stakeholders to submit ideas to address a workplace challenge. Second, a panel of stakeholders and scientists deliberated over and ranked the tournament ideas. An instant runoff election was held to select the winning idea. Third, the research team piloted the winning idea in a primary care practice using rapid prototyping, an approach that quickly refines and iterates strategy designs. RESULTS: The innovation tournament yielded 31 ideas and 32 barriers from diverse stakeholders (12 primary care physicians, 10 medical assistants, 4 nurse practitioners, 2 practice managers, and 4 patient support assistants). A panel of 6 stakeholders and scientists deliberated on the ideas and voted for patient self-report (i.e., through tablet computers, text message, or an online patient portal) as the winning idea. The research team rapid prototyped tablets in one primary care practice with one physician over 5 five-hour shifts to examine the feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness of the strategy. Most patients, the physician, and medical assistants found the tablets acceptable and feasible. However, patient support assistants struggled to incorporate them in their workflow and expressed concerns about scaling up the process. Depression screening rates were higher using tablets compared to usual care; follow-up was comparable between tablets and usual care. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid participatory methods engaged and amplified the voices of diverse stakeholders in primary care. These methods helped design an acceptable and feasible implementation strategy that showed promise for increasing depression screening in a primary care setting. The next step is to evaluate the strategy in a randomized controlled trial across primary care practices.

Systematic review of clinician-directed nudges in healthcare contexts.

OBJECTIVE: Nudges are interventions that alter the way options are presented, enabling individuals to more easily select the best option. Health systems and researchers have tested nudges to shape clinician decision-making with the aim of improving healthcare service delivery. We aimed to systematically study the use and effectiveness of nudges designed to improve clinicians' decisions in healthcare settings. DESIGN: A systematic review was conducted to collect and consolidate results from studies testing nudges and to determine whether nudges directed at improving clinical decisions in healthcare settings across clinician types were effective. We systematically searched seven databases (EBSCO MegaFILE, EconLit, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science) and used a snowball sampling technique to identify peer-reviewed published studies available between 1 January 1984 and 22 April 2020. Eligible studies were critically appraised and narratively synthesised. We categorised nudges according to a taxonomy derived from the Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Included studies were appraised using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. RESULTS: We screened 3608 studies and 39 studies met our criteria. The majority of the studies (90%) were conducted in the USA and 36% were randomised controlled trials. The most commonly studied nudge intervention (46%) framed information for clinicians, often through peer comparison feedback. Nudges that guided clinical decisions through default options or by enabling choice were also frequently studied (31%). Information framing, default and enabling choice nudges showed promise, whereas the effectiveness of other nudge types was mixed. Given the inclusion of non-experimental designs, only a small portion of studies were at minimal risk of bias (33%) across all Cochrane criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Nudges that frame information, change default options or enable choice are frequently studied and show promise in improving clinical decision-making. Future work should examine how nudges compare to non-nudge interventions (eg, policy interventions) in improving healthcare.

Addressing Common Challenges in the Implementation of Collaborative Care for Mental Health: The Penn Integrated Care Program.

PURPOSE: We developed and implemented a new model of collaborative care that includes a triage and referral management system. We present initial implementation metrics using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. METHODS: Primary care clinicians in 8 practices referred patients with any unmet mental health needs to the Penn Integrated Care program. Assessments were conducted using validated measures. Patients were primarily triaged to collaborative care (26%) or specialty mental health care with active referral management (70%). We conducted 50 qualitative interviews to understand the implementation process and inform program refinement. Our primary outcomes were reach and implementation metrics, including referral and encounter rates derived from the electronic health record. RESULTS: In 12 months, 6,124 unique patients were referred. Assessed patients reported symptoms consistent with a range of conditions from mild to moderate depression and anxiety to serious mental illnesses including psychosis and acute suicidal ideation. Among patients enrolled in collaborative care, treatment entailed a mean of 7.2 (SD 5.1) encounters over 78.1 (SD 51.3) days. Remission of symptoms was achieved by 32.6% of patients with depression and 39.5% of patients with anxiety. Stakeholders viewed the program favorably and had concrete suggestions to ensure sustainability. CONCLUSIONS: The Penn Integrated Care program demonstrated broad reach. Implementation was consistent with collaborative care as delivered in seminal studies of the model. Our results provide insight into a model for launching and implementing collaborative care to meet the needs of a diverse group of patients with the full range of mental health conditions seen in primary care.

Using behavioral insights to design implementation strategies in public mental health settings: a qualitative study of clinical decision-making.

BACKGROUND: Trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy (TF-CBT) is an evidence-based intervention for youth with posttraumatic stress disorder. An important component of TF-CBT is the trauma narrative (TN), a phase in the intervention in which youth are guided to process the memories, thoughts, and feelings associated with their traumatic experience(s). Previous work has shown that TF-CBT clinicians complete TNs with only half of their clients, yet little is known about what determines TF-CBT clinicians' use of TNs. The behavioral insights literature-an interdisciplinary field studying judgment and decision-making-offers theoretical and empirical tools to conceptualize what drives complex human behaviors and decisions. Drawing from the behavioral insights literature, the present study seeks to understand what determines clinician use of TNs and to generate strategies that target these determinants. METHODS: Through semi-structured qualitative interviews, we sought the perspectives of trained TF-CBT clinicians working in public mental health settings across the city of Philadelphia (N = 17) to understand their decisions to use TNs with clients. We analyzed the qualitative data using a coding approach informed by the behavioral insights literature. We used an iterative process of structured hypothesis generation, aided by a behavioral insights guide, and rapid validation informed by behavioral insights to uncover the determinants of TN use. We then generated implementation strategies that targeted these determinants using the "Easy Attractive Social Timely" framework, a behavioral insights design approach. RESULTS: We generated and validated three broad themes about what determines clinician implementation of TNs: decision complexity, clinician affective experience, and agency norms. We hypothesized behavioral insights that underlie these implementation determinants and designed a list of nine corresponding behavioral insights strategies that may facilitate TN implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Our study investigated why an effective component of an evidence-based intervention is difficult to implement. We leveraged robust scientific theories and empirical regularities from the behavioral insights literature to understand clinician perspectives on TN implementation. These factors were theoretically linked to implementation strategies. Our work revealed the potential for using behavioral insights in the diagnosis of evidence-based intervention determinants and the design of implementation strategies.

Applying NUDGE to Inform Design of EBP Implementation Strategies in Community Mental Health Settings.

We demonstrate the application of NUDGE (Narrow, Understand, Discover, Generate, Evaluate), a behavioral economics approach to systematically identifying behavioral barriers that impede behavior enactment, to the challenge of evidence-based practice (EBP) use in community behavioral health. Drawing on 65 clinician responses to a system-wide crowdsourcing challenge about EBP underutilization, we applied NUDGE to discover, synthesize and validate specific behavioral barriers to EBP utilization that directly inform the design of tailored implementation strategies. To our knowledge, this is the first study to apply behavioral economic insights to clinician-proposed solutions to implementation challenges in order to design implementation strategies. The study demonstrates the successful application of NUDGE to implementation strategy design and provides novel targets for intervention.

Evidence Base Update for Brief, Free, and Accessible Youth Mental Health Measures.

Evidence-based assessment (EBA) is foundational to high-quality mental health care for youth and is a critical component of evidence-based practice delivery, yet is underused in the community. Administration time and measure cost are barriers to use; thus, identifying and disseminating brief, free, and accessible measures are critical. This Evidence Base Update evaluates the empirical literature for brief, free, and accessible measures with psychometric support to inform research and practice with youth. A systematic review using PubMed and PsycINFO identified measures in the following domains: overall mental health, anxiety, depression, disruptive behavior, traumatic stress, disordered eating, suicidality, bipolar/mania, psychosis, and substance use. To be eligible for inclusion, measures needed to be brief (50 items or less), free, accessible, and have psychometric support for their use with youth. Eligible measures were evaluated using adapted criteria established by De Los Reyes and Langer (2018) and were classified as having excellent, good, or adequate psychometric properties. A total of 672 measures were identified; 95 (14%) met inclusion criteria. Of those, 21 (22%) were "excellent," 34 (36%) were "good," and 40 (42%) were "adequate." Few measures had support for their use to routinely monitor progress in therapy. Few measures with excellent psychometric support were identified for disordered eating, suicidality, psychosis, and substance use. Future research should evaluate existing measures for use with routine progress monitoring and ease of implementation in community settings. Measure development is needed for disordered eating, suicidality, psychosis, and substance use to increase availability of brief, free, accessible, and validated measures.

Sociodemographic characteristics of youth in a trauma focused-cognitive behavioral therapy effectiveness trial in the city of Philadelphia.

While randomized controlled trials of trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy (TF-CBT) have demonstrated efficacy for youth with posttraumatic stress disorder, TF-CBT effectiveness trials typically show attenuated outcomes. This decrease in effectiveness may be due to the differences in sociodemographic characteristics of youth in these trials; youth in efficacy trials are more often white and middle-income, whereas youth in effectiveness trials are more often racial/ethnic minorities, of low socioeconomic status (SES) and live in high crime neighborhoods. In this study-drawn from an effectiveness trial of TF-CBT in community mental health clinics across Philadelphia-we describe the sociodemographic characteristics of enrolled youth. We measured neighborhood SES by matching participants' addresses to American Community Survey data from their Census tracts, housing stability using the National Outcomes Measurement System, and neighborhood violence using police department crime statistics. Our results suggest that the majority of youth presenting for TF-CBT in mental health clinics in the City of Philadelphia live in poor and high-crime neighborhoods, experience substantial housing instability, and are predominantly ethnic and racial minorities. Thus, youth presenting for treatment experience significant racial and socioeconomic adversity. We also explored the association between these characteristics and youth symptom severity upon presenting for treatment. These factors were not associated with youth symptom severity or overall mental health functioning in our sample (with small effect sizes and p > .05 for all). Implications for future research, such as the need for efficacy and effectiveness trials to more fully characterize their samples and the need for pragmatic trials are discussed.