What Type of Kids "Succeeded" in Behrens Study?

[Whooter]

Here is another snippet:

Of the 203 female adolescents who completed the YSR at admission and discharge, 90% reported
some degree or amount of symptom reduction. Of that, 48% reported improvement that exceeds
the cut-off for reliable change (>29 raw score points) and 42% reported improvement below the
cut-off for reliable change (<29 raw score points).

Page 9 again:

Residential Treatment Outcome-Study



...

[Pile of Dead Kids]

And now he's reduced to throwing out quotes from a "study" that was already thoroughly debunked.

The thing can say whatever it wants. It's not scientific, never was peer reviewed, relied on self-reporting, excluded portions of what would have been the sample, and the promised follow-up was simply never done. If you like, we can throw quotes from the Eddas at you to tell you all about how the world is grown from the tree Yggdrasil. It has exactly as much scientific weight.

[Troll Control]

So again Whooter's admitting only 48% success (this is for girls, BTW - only 31% for boys, a similar sample to other research which showed more than double the success rate) while public programs show 60-80% success maintained over the follow up period of a clinical longitudinal study.  

This study has no follow up, is not clinical, no control group, no data acquired outside of program walls.  Even with all of this data scrubbing and faulty methodology, it's still far less successful than public programs right out of the box, not to mention a year or more out.

[Whooter]

So again Whooter's admitting only 48% success (this is for girls, BTW - only 31% for boys, a similar sample to other research which showed more than double the success rate) while public programs show 60-80% success maintained over the follow up period of a clinical longitudinal study.  

This study has no follow up, is not clinical, no control group, no data acquired outside of program walls.  Even with all of this data scrubbing and faulty methodology, it's still far less successful than public programs right out of the box, not to mention a year or more out.

Hmmmm.......Combining these criteria, 78% of adolescent females
reported a change in symptoms that was consistent with recovery and reliable change.

Residential Treatment Outcome-Study



...

[Pile of shit]

Whooter you're an ed con.  WOW!!!  I didn't know that!  How many  children are you responsible for placing in programs?

[Troll Control]

Great question.

[Whooter]

Take a look at the males in the study and they were a little lower:


Combining the reliability and recovery scores statistically, 66% of adolescent males reported a change in
symptoms that was both of sufficient quantity and quality that it was considered clinically
meaningful or clinically significant.

Page 9
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study



...

[DannyB II]

And now he's reduced to throwing out quotes from a "study" that was already thoroughly debunked.

The thing can say whatever it wants. It's not scientific, never was peer reviewed, relied on self-reporting, excluded portions of what would have been the sample, and the promised follow-up was simply never done. If you like, we can throw quotes from the Edda's at you to tell you all about how the world is grown from the tree Yggdrasil. It has exactly as much scientific weight.

 poop......

[Troll Control]

Whooter you're an ed con.  WOW!!!  I didn't know that!  How many  children are you responsible for placing in programs?

Inartfully dodged...

[Pile of shit]

He is affiliated with Lon Woodbury.  WOW!!!

[DannyB II]

And now he's reduced to throwing out quotes from a "study" that was already thoroughly debunked.

The thing can say whatever it wants. It's not scientific, never was peer reviewed, relied on self-reporting, excluded portions of what would have been the sample, and the promised follow-up was simply never done. If you like, we can throw quotes from the Eddas at you to tell you all about how the world is grown from the tree Yggdrasil. It has exactly as much scientific weight.

I would love to make babies with you under the "world tree" and have you quote Edda to me. We will create scientific weight.

[Pile of shit]

And now he's reduced to throwing out quotes from a "study" that was already thoroughly debunked.

The thing can say whatever it wants. It's not scientific, never was peer reviewed, relied on self-reporting, excluded portions of what would have been the sample, and the promised follow-up was simply never done. If you like, we can throw quotes from the Eddas at you to tell you all about how the world is grown from the tree Yggdrasil. It has exactly as much scientific weight.

I would love to make babies with you under the "world tree" and have you quote Edda to me. We will create scientific weight.

Is this Danny 1, 2 or 3?   :roflmao:  :roflmao:

[Troll Control]

These final results indicated that adolescents who
had lower levels of psycho-social symptoms at admission (adolescent report), the absence of a
mood disorder, a positive experience in the program, a sense that their problems had improved,
and parents who were satisfied with the program were more likely to report positive outcomes at
discharge from residential treatment.

Well, there goes the "programs help kids with severe problems - too severe for local treatment" angle.

The kids who self-reported to have improved had no severe problems to begin with, no mood disorders and parents who were satisfied with their purchase.

So, the more or less "normal teens" showed improvement but the ones with real problems were pulled by their parents because they weren't improving or dropped from the program because they were accepted even though the program had no ability to help them (26% of participants).

Also keep in mind there has never been any follow up to determine if any of these results were lasting.  Previous research has shown severe degradation of results beginning immediately after discharge.

Easy with the trolling, Danny.  We have a topic here.

[DannyB II]

And now he's reduced to throwing out quotes from a "study" that was already thoroughly debunked.

The thing can say whatever it wants. It's not scientific, never was peer reviewed, relied on self-reporting, excluded portions of what would have been the sample, and the promised follow-up was simply never done. If you like, we can throw quotes from the Eddas at you to tell you all about how the world is grown from the tree Yggdrasil. It has exactly as much scientific weight.

I would love to make babies with you under the "world tree" and have you quote Edda to me. We will create scientific weight.

Is this Danny 1, 2 or 3?   :roflmao:  :roflmao:

I was asked to stop spamming and I will respect that wish.

[Troll Control]

Thanks, bro.  Much appreciated.  Back to the topic at hand...

These final results indicated that adolescents who
had lower levels of psycho-social symptoms at admission (adolescent report), the absence of a
mood disorder, a positive experience in the program, a sense that their problems had improved,
and parents who were satisfied with the program were more likely to report positive outcomes at
discharge from residential treatment.

Well, there goes the "programs help kids with severe problems - too severe for local treatment" angle.

The kids who self-reported to have improved had no severe problems to begin with, no mood disorders and parents who were satisfied with their purchase.

So, the more or less "normal teens" showed improvement but the ones with real problems were pulled by their parents because they weren't improving or dropped from the program because they were accepted even though the program had no ability to help them (26% of participants).

Also keep in mind there has never been any follow up to determine if any of these results were lasting.  Previous research has shown severe degradation of results beginning immediately after discharge.