Page 21 - Age of onset of disruptive behavior of residentially treated adolescents -Sjoukje de Boer
P. 21

The measurements were conducted by research assistants. These research 1 assistants were psychology students in the final year of their master program, and
were trained and supervised by the main researcher. The information was gathered on standardized forms used in the context of the ongoing program evaluation research.
Some of the data originated from patient interview, some were collected through file
review and some by self-report instruments (client ratings, parent ratings).
At T0 the participants filled in the Symptom Checklist (SCL-90-R)(Arrindell & Ettema, 2003) and their parents filled in a Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL)(Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001). At T1 participants filled in the SCL-90-R and Youth Self Report (YSR)(Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001; Verhulst, Van der Ende, & Koot, 1997) and were interviewed on socio-demographic information (e.g., sex, age, ethnicity), substance usage (drugs and alcohol) and previous criminal offending. The period for which the information was collected was from birth to admission. The SCL-90-R was administered at all measurements to obtain an indication of the psychological functioning at that specific time. At T2, the youngsters filled in the SCL-90-R and YSR and information was gathered by interview (e.g., residence, school, work after discharge). When involved, parents were approached with the request to fill in the CBCL and the Tevredenheidlijst Ouders Residentiele Jeugdhulpverlening (TOR-J) (Boon, De Boer, & De Haan, 2010). At T3, on average one and a half year follow-up (M = 1.51 years, SD = 0.69, min. 0.91 - max. 4.55 years), the participants filled out the SCL-90-R and YSR, and were interviewed on living conditions, daytime activities (e,g., school, work), substance usage, and criminal offending. The period for which the information was collected was from discharge to follow-up. To obtain a fair image of how the participant was doing and to ensure the reliability of the data, the interview at follow-up took place at the residence of the participant (see Figure 1).
The research initiated at De Fjord can be seen as Routine Outcome Measurement (ROM) avant la lettre. At fixed measurement points before (intake), during (admission) and after treatment (discharge, and one and a half year follow-up) the results of the intervention were monitored and this outcome was reported on a regular basis to the management and the therapists. In doing so, the results could contribute to the improvement of the treatment.
 19




























































































   19   20   21   22   23