Test-retest stability, convergent validity, and sensitivity to change for the Goal-Based Outcome tool for adolescents: Analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial

How do we know whether treatment has failed? Paradoxical outcomes in counseling with young people

Background

In both routine practice contexts and research studies, evidence from standardized self-report symptom measures, administered pre- and post-treatment, is predominantly used to determine whether psychotherapy has been successful. Understanding the nature of unsuccessful psychotherapy requires an ability to evaluate the credibility of outcome data generated by such techniques. An important body of research has identified discrepancies between outcomes assessed through symptom measures and those obtained from other sources. However, not enough is known about the extent to which such paradoxical outcomes exist.

Objective

This study analyzes the relationship between outcomes, as assessed by a standardized self-report measure, and as assessed by ratings of young people's descriptions of change at post-counseling interviews.

Methods

Participants were 50 young people (13-16 years old) who had taken part in a trial of up to 10 weeks of school-based humanistic counseling. Our primary standardized measure was the Young Person's CORE (YP-CORE). To assess young people's experiences of counseling change, three independent raters scrutinized transcripts of post-counseling interviews, and scored levels of helpfulness on a 1 (Not at all helpful) to 10 (Extremely helpful) scale. Inter-rater reliabilities were 0.94 (Cronbach's Alpha) and 0.96 (McDonald's Omega). Sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore relationships between helpfulness ratings and other outcome measures, i.e., satisfaction with counseling (ESQ) and the Goal-Based-Outcome Tool (GBO), and process measures, i.e., the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI-S) and the Barret Lennard Relationship Inventory (BLRI).

Results

Multilevel analysis indicated that helpfulness ratings were not significantly associated with changes in YP-CORE scores. Analyzed categorically, 38% of those showing reliable improvement on the standardized measure were below the median for self-described helpfulness, and 47% of those not showing reliable change were at or above the median for self-described helpfulness. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated closer correlations between helpfulness ratings and other outcome measures (ESQ and GBO), and between helpfulness ratings and process measures (WAI-S and BLRI).

Discussion

Our results raise questions about reliance on symptom change outcome measures for defining treatment success and failure, given their disparity with clients' own descriptions of the helpfulness of therapy. Implications for practice and research are discussed.

Data-Informed Communication: How Measurement-Based Care Can Optimize Child Psychotherapy

Measurement-based care (MBC) research and practice, including clinical workflows and systems to support MBC, are grounded in adult-serving mental health systems. MBC research evidence is building in child and adolescent services, but MBC practice is inherently more complex due to identified client age, the family system and the need to involve multiple reporters. This paper seeks to address a gap in the literature by providing practical guidance for youth-serving clinicians implementing MBC with children and their families. We focus on MBC as a data-informed, client-centered communication process, and present three key strategies to enhance usual care child and adolescent psychotherapy via developmentally-appropriate MBC. These strategies include (1) go beyond standardized measures; (2) lean into discrepancies; and (3) get curious together. Case-based examples drawn from various child-serving settings illustrate these key strategies of MBC in child psychotherapy.