English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The training of clinical psychologists in general, and clinical child and pediatric psychologists in particular, has received significant commentary and evaluation in recent years (e.g., Cherry, Messenger, & Jacoby, 2000; Freedheim & Overholser, 1997; Kenny & Chmielewski, 1996; Roberts et al., 1998). Consistent with the biblical proverb of “iron sharpening iron,” the field of pediatric psychology, in particular, has benefited from the comments and critiques offered in the past. Perhaps owing to the earlier observations of a number of commentators, the recommendations for the training of pediatric psychologists offered by the Society of Pediatric Psychology (SPP) Task Force Report (Spirito et al., this issue) provide a thorough guide for program construction, program evaluation, and, possibly, program reinvention. A brief overview of several of the components of the Clinical Child Psychology Program (CCPP) at the University of Kansas (KU) presents an opportunity to examine how one program compares to the recommendations provided by the task force.

Predoctoral Training in Pediatric Psychology at the University of Kansas Clinical Child Psychology Program