A preview of this full-text is provided by American Psychological Association.
Content available from Clinical Psychology Science and Practice
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Evidence-Based Treatments for Children and Adolescents:
An Updated Review of Indicators of Efficacy and
Effectiveness
Bruce F. Chorpita, University of California, Los Angeles
Eric L. Daleiden, PracticeWise, LLC
Chad Ebesutani, University of California, Los Angeles
John Young, University of Mississippi
Kimberly D. Becker, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
Brad J. Nakamura, University of Hawaii
Lisa Phillips, PracticeWise, LLC
Alyssa Ward, University of California, Los Angeles
Roxanna Lynch, University of Hawaii
Lindsay Trent, University of Mississippi
Rita L. Smith, University of California, San Francisco
Kelsie Okamura, University of Hawaii
Nicole Starace, University of California, Los Angeles
This updated review of evidence-based treatments fol-
lows the original review performed by the Hawaii Task
Force. Over 750 treatment protocols from 435 studies
were coded and rated on a 5-level strength of evidence
system. Results showed large numbers of evidence-
based treatments applicable to anxiety, attention, aut-
ism, depression, disruptive behavior, eating problems,
substance use, and traumatic stress. Treatments were
reviewed in terms of diversity of client characteristics,
treatment settings and formats, therapist characteris-
tics, and other variables potentially related to feasibility
and generalizability. Overall, the literature has
expanded considerably since the previous review, yield-
ing a growing list of options and information available
to guide decisions about treatment selection.
Key words:
children, dissemination, evidence-based,
services.
[Clin Psychol Sci Prac 18: 154–172, 2011]
Numerous reviews of the child and adolescent treatment
literatures have been conducted over the past 30 years
(Lonigan, Elbert, & Bennett-Johnson, 1998; Silverman
& Hinshaw, 2008; Weisz, Hawley, & Jensen-Doss,
2004; Weisz, Weiss, Han, Granger, & Morton, 1995).
Our last comprehensive report (Chorpita et al., 2002)
preceded several advances, both in the scope and
methods of review and in the children’s mental health
literature. The mental health field in general continues
its focus on evidence-based practice, although there has
been continued controversy over definitions (e.g., APA
Presidential Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice,
Address correspondence to Bruce F. Chorpita, Department of
Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, Box
951563, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1563. E-mail: chorpita@
ucla.edu.
2011 American Psychological Association. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc., on behalf of the American Psychological Association.
All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: permissionsuk@wiley.com 154
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.