On 2013 Oct 23, Rae Thomas commented:

We recently presented this paper at our Journal Club to discuss “How could meta-analyses convey meaningful results regarding effective interventions in child mental health to clinicians?”

There seems a lack of evidence-based treatments provided to children within child mental health settings •Hoagwood & Olin, 2002 reported 90% of publicly funded child mental health services didn’t use EBTs •Allen, Gharagozloo, & Johnson, 2012 reported clinicians could identify less than 2/5 expert nominated EBTs from a list of 15 •Thomas, Zimmer-Gembeck, & Chaffin, 2013 reported 58% of clinicians could defined an EBT using broad criteria and indicated use but 24% identified broad frameworks and of those 58% of actual EBTs in use, 88% of clinicians said they modified the EBTs

Previous meta-analyses considered intervention effectiveness using other variables •Individual interventions (Geeraert et al., 2004) •Settings (e.g., clinic vs home; Selph et al., 2013) •Components of interventions (Kaminski et al., 2008) •Components and Implementation of interventions (Durlak et al., 2011)

Our Group Discussion •Because of intervention heterogeneity, often meta-analyses in these formats provide little information for clinicians about what intervention is most effective for which population, even so, cost to implement an intervention may be prohibitive for some organisations. In this paper, effects of social and emotional learning programs were moderated by how the program was implemented. •A meta-regression of studies to consider the unique contributors to effective interventions may provide more useful information to clinicians (i.e., quality of studies, components of effective interventions). However, if possible, clinicians should be given both options (i.e., an effective intervention and components of effective interventions).

On 2013 Oct 23, Rae Thomas commented:

We recently presented this paper at our Journal Club to discuss “How could meta-analyses convey meaningful results regarding effective interventions in child mental health to clinicians?”

There seems a lack of evidence-based treatments provided to children within child mental health settings •Hoagwood & Olin, 2002 reported 90% of publicly funded child mental health services didn’t use EBTs •Allen, Gharagozloo, & Johnson, 2012 reported clinicians could identify less than 2/5 expert nominated EBTs from a list of 15 •Thomas, Zimmer-Gembeck, & Chaffin, 2013 reported 58% of clinicians could defined an EBT using broad criteria and indicated use but 24% identified broad frameworks and of those 58% of actual EBTs in use, 88% of clinicians said they modified the EBTs

Previous meta-analyses considered intervention effectiveness using other variables •Individual interventions (Geeraert et al., 2004) •Settings (e.g., clinic vs home; Selph et al., 2013) •Components of interventions (Kaminski et al., 2008) •Components and Implementation of interventions (Durlak et al., 2011)

Our Group Discussion •Because of intervention heterogeneity, often meta-analyses in these formats provide little information for clinicians about what intervention is most effective for which population, even so, cost to implement an intervention may be prohibitive for some organisations. In this paper, effects of social and emotional learning programs were moderated by how the program was implemented. •A meta-regression of studies to consider the unique contributors to effective interventions may provide more useful information to clinicians (i.e., quality of studies, components of effective interventions). However, if possible, clinicians should be given both options (i.e., an effective intervention and components of effective interventions).