Premium
Treatment fidelity reporting in intervention outcome studies in the school psychology literature from 2009 to 2016
Author(s) -
Sanetti Lisa M. Hagermoser,
Charbonneau Sarah,
Knight Allison,
Cochrane Wendy S.,
Kulcyk Molly C. M.,
Kraus Katherine E.
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
psychology in the schools
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.738
H-Index - 75
eISSN - 1520-6807
pISSN - 0033-3085
DOI - 10.1002/pits.22364
Subject(s) - fidelity , psychology , intervention (counseling) , outcome (game theory) , dimension (graph theory) , clinical psychology , applied psychology , computer science , psychiatry , telecommunications , mathematics , mathematical economics , pure mathematics
Both student outcomes and treatment fidelity data are necessary to draw valid conclusions about intervention effectiveness. Reviews of the intervention outcome literature in related fields, and prior reviews of the school psychology literature, suggest that many researchers failed to report treatment fidelity data. The purpose of this study was to replicate and extend previous reviews of treatment fidelity in four school psychology journals between 2009 and 2016. Results indicate that a plurality of studies reviewed operationally defined some, but not all intervention(s). Further, the majority of studies (72.8%) include a quantitative treatment fidelity data, a 35% increase from the Sanetti, Gritter and Dobey (2011) review of these same journals. Results also indicate many studies include data on multiple dimensions of fidelity. Of the multiple dimensions, adherence is (a) the most commonly reported dimension, (b) most often reported using a single index, (c) assessed using in vivo observation, and (d) high in a majority of studies. Further, results indicate some study and design characteristics are associated with the presence of operational definitions and treatment fidelity data.