General Interest > Feed Your Head
Group Therapy increasing Drug Risk?????/
Troll Control:
--- Quote from: "Behrens Study" ---A number of issues warrant further research attention...this study did not use a control group.
--- End quote ---
No control group? What did they measure against?
--- Quote from: "Behrens Study" ---Future research in private residential treatment needs to address the question of post-discharge maintenance of treatment gains. The residential treatment literature indicates that a significant portion of adolescents who function well at discharge subsequently experience a decline when transferred to a lower level-of-care (Curry, 1991; Epstein, 2004; Hair, 2005). The second phase of this study will explore that issue using the private residential data of the present study as the point of comparison.
--- End quote ---
It has been almost six years since this study was performed. Why has the "second phase" never been conducted?
Aspen got the marketing tool it wanted from the first, deeply flawed project which has no scientific validity, as admitted in the work itself. Just read it. Why would they pay for a second phase when they know the kids take a nose-dive after the program (e.g. Whooter's daughter, et al)?
Whooter:
--- Quote from: "Dysfunction Junction" ---This work used two self-report surveys, the YSR (Youth Self Report), and the CBCL (Child Behavior Check List), each of which consist of a ten minute checklist.
--- End quote ---
It doesnt appear that you are too familiar with the Youth Self Reports. These collect a little more information than just a check list, there is also a written section to elaborate on their stay , concerns etc.
--- Quote ---Additionally, the YSR and CBCL are both data acquisition tools that are exempt from continuing review under 45 CFR 46 101(b), so these findings have never been reviewed or analyzed.
--- End quote ---
The exemption would be denied if they applied for it if the YSR and/or CBCL had any ID# or the childs name which could trace a child back to the report that was submitted. WIRB would need to review the process used and the YSR/CBCL to see if they comply with this condition (and others) before they can be considered for exemption. I haven't seen it stated anywhere in this study where they applied and/or took this exemption.
Example: 46.101(B)
(2) Research involving the use of educational tests (cognitive, diagnostic, aptitude, achievement), survey procedures, interview procedures or observation of public behavior, unless:
(i) information obtained is recorded in such a manner that human subjects can be identified, directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects; and (ii) any disclosure of the human subjects' responses outside the research could reasonably place the subjects at risk of criminal or civil liability or be damaging to the subjects' financial standing, employability, or reputation.
...
Whooter:
--- Quote from: "Dysfunction Junction" ---The majority of subjects were in programs only six months, that is, pulled early against program protestations.
--- End quote ---
DJ you are misquoting and misinterpreting the study left and right. Lets be careful, here is a quote from the study:
The study states:
The average length of stay was 8.6 months for those discharged with maximum benefit
and 6.5 months for who were discharged with partial benefit or against program advice. The
majority discharged with program approval: 53% with maximum benefit, 19% prematurely but
with approval, 15% against program advice, 8% needed treatment beyond the scope of the
program, and 3% “other” discharge status.
...
Troll Control:
--- Quote from: "YSR Instructions" ---Time required:
Approximately 10 minutes.
--- End quote ---
That's right from the instructions. I tend to believe the test designer over an anonymous poster.
As far as average length of stay is concerned, I made no representation whatsoever. How could I have "misrepresented" something I never even mentioned? That makes no sense.
I would hope, being a smart guy and all, you understand that the average tells nothing of the distribution above and below it.
You could have 10 kids stay for one month and five kids stay for 24 months and the average would be 8.6 months with the vast majority of kids staying less than 1 month and 1 day. It's called mathematics. You should look it up. I wonder how you claim to have such vast experience with statistics and not even understand the concept of an average? :bs:
Regarding YSR reporting...It is exempt because the children's names or identities are mentioned nowhere in the study nor can their identities be inferred from any information in the study. They would be recorded in the data set by the researcher as "Subject 1," "Subject 2" or "Reporter 1," or "Reporter 2." Show me a study that says "the subjects were John Smith, Jane White" etc. It's not done that way and I think we all know that by now.
Yesterday you said 45 CFR 46 doesn't even pertain to this study because "it's a study, not a high school test," an obvious lie that shows your ignorance on the subject as well, and now you're claiming to understand exemptions under the title. :roflmao: You were saying yesterday high school tests are subject to federal regulations, but studies aren't. :roflmao: ::) You've no idea what you're talking about and quite obviously have never had any experience with human research.
Whooter:
--- Quote from: "Dysfunction Junction" ---Regarding YSR reporting...It is exempt because the children's names or identities are mentioned nowhere in the study nor can their identities be inferred from any information in the study. They would be recorded in the data set by the researcher as "Subject 1," "Subject 2" or "Reporter 1," or "Reporter 2." Show me a study that says "the subjects were John Smith, Jane White" etc. It's not done that way and I think we all know that by now.
--- End quote ---
DJ, nobody would list the names of the 1,000 kids in the body of the study itself. They are concerned that the kids identities remain safe. Read the requirements again:
--- Quote ---Research involving the use of educational tests (cognitive, diagnostic, aptitude, achievement), survey procedures, interview procedures or observation of public behavior, (i) unless:
information obtained is recorded in such a manner that human subjects can be identified, directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects; and (ii) any disclosure of the human subjects' responses outside the research could reasonably place the subjects at risk of criminal or civil liability or be damaging to the subjects' financial standing, employability, or reputation.
--- End quote ---
YSRs ask for the persons name (it is not anonymous) and it is set up to link to identifiers via an id system. In order to be exempt they would have to adopt a system which keeps the people being surveyed completely anonymous so that the children can remain safe. The review board would have to look at how the names are handled to determine if the parents names and those of their childrens will remain safe from being linked to "Subject 1".."Subject 2" etc. before they allowed exemption.
Here is a sample of the Youth Self Report , you will see that they ask for the childs name and there is an id number assigned to connect each report to the childs name. You will also notice it is more than just as checklist (as you claimed). They capture written feedback from each person surveyed.
...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version