Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Stepping Stones Triple P: the importance of putting the findings into context – a response to Tellegen and Sofronoff
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Stepping Stones Triple P: the importance of putting the findings into context – a response to Tellegen and Sofronoff
Do you wish to request the book?
Stepping Stones Triple P: the importance of putting the findings into context – a response to Tellegen and Sofronoff
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Stepping Stones Triple P: the importance of putting the findings into context – a response to Tellegen and Sofronoff
2015
Overview
Recently, we reported the findings of a randomized controlled trial on the effectiveness of Stepping Stones Triple P (SSTP) compared to Care as Usual (CAU), in
BMC Medicine
. The study involved parents of 209 children with Borderline to Mild Intellectual Disability (BMID), included following a school-based assessment of psychosocial problems. We found that SSTP had some short-term advantages over CAU, i.e., a reduction of parenting stress and of teacher-reported psychosocial problems, but no long-term advantages, at 6 months after the intervention. Tellegen and Sofronoff criticized that we included a limited amount of studies on the effectiveness of SSTP, and that the interpretation of our findings was inadequate. Regarding available evidence, we confined our summary to published high-quality RCTs regarding individual SSTP on level 4 – our RCT concerned that type of SSTP. Consequently, many studies were excluded but in a very adequate way. Regarding interpretation, Tellegen and Sofronoff criticized that we compared SSTP with CAU, but seem to be unware that this is consonant with current guidelines. Moreover, they noted that 49% of the parents who started SSTP followed less than half of the intended number of sessions. However, our findings on those who completed SSTP showed no more advantages of SSTP in the long term than CAU. We therefore stick to our conclusion that SSTP has some advantages in the short term compared to CAU, but not in the long term. The major burden of psychosocial problems in children with BMID prompts for further improvements.
Please see related articles:
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/12/191
and
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/13/25
Publisher
BioMed Central,BioMed Central Ltd
Subject
