What Type of Kids "Succeeded" in Behrens Study?

[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.

[Anne Bonney]

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.

Wow....so kids that truly needed help, not quack "therapy", didn't fare so well.  Hmmmm.  And why send a kid away if they're not in real trouble?  Why were these kids that "had lower levels of psycho-social symptoms at admission (adolescent report), the absence of a mood disorder," even there in the first place?  Parents....do your damn job and quit farming it out to strangers!

[Whooter]

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.

These would be the ones to be more likely to report a positive outcome.

Think about the kids who had high levels of psycho-social symptoms, then add a mood disorder, then add a negative experience in the program along with parents who were not satisfied.  They would be at the other end and would not be as likely to report a positive outcome.

So the further the child had to be brought along to get them into the "Normal" range the less likely they would be to succeed or report a favorable outcome.



...

[Whooter]

I found this interesting:

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.

It shows that 8% of the children were discharged early because they needed help outside the scope of the program.  I found this interesting because there was always this feeling that programs would keep kids even if they were not getting the help they needed or were not a good fit.

I think as screening processes improve they will be able to reduce the number od kids who are accepted and are not a good fit for the program.

This is one of the strengths of having studies done.



...

[Troll Control]

If you look at the data, the kids who had to be "brought further long" were dropped from the program or pulled by their parents because the level of care they were sold wasn't evident.  This accounts for 26% of the kids surveyed.  3% also completed the program but got worse.  

Only 31% (compared with 60-80% of those in traditional treatment who were diagnosed with real mental issues) showed statistically relevent improvement (2 standard deviations of self-reported change) and those kids were the one's without any real problems.  97% had a primary presenting problem of "rule breaking."

In other words, these kids never needed to be placed.  Aspen's "success rate" is two and a half times lower than traditional treatment even though the vast majority of the kids had no real issues (74%).  

Aspen got rid of the kids with real problems (8%) and kept the ones who were easy to deal with, even though most didn't need to be there (74%).  So they do keep kids that don't need to be there at all, provided they don't require any help and they just collect the checks.

[Whooter]

The majority of adolescents were treated for multiple problems (85.5%). The most frequent treatment foci were disruptive
behavior disorders (44%), substance use disorders (36%), and mood disorder (31%) (percentages
did not total 100% because participants could have more than one problem).

So 85.5% of the kids were there for multiple reasons and 8% of the kids the program felt would not be successful and they were discharged early.



...

[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.

Wow....so kids that truly needed help, not quack "therapy", didn't fare so well.  Hmmmm.  And why send a kid away if they're not in real trouble?  Why were these kids that "had lower levels of psycho-social symptoms at admission (adolescent report), the absence of a mood disorder," even there in the first place?  Parents....do your damn job and quit farming it out to strangers!

Yep, you hit it on the head, Anne.

[Whooter]

I found this interesting.  The kids with the lower grade point averages (had greater behavioral issues) but managed to improve to the same levels as those with less externalized behavior issues by the time they were discharged.

These analyses suggest adolescents with low grade point averages reportedly had a
relatively higher amount of externalizing behavior at admission, coupled with a greater degree of
change on externalizing behavior during treatment, leading them to discharge with externalizing
scores within the normal range and comparable to those with high grade point averages.

...

[Troll Control]

I found this interesting.

More evidence that this report is just for marketing purposes.  31% success rate is not very impressive either.

[Whooter]

I found this interesting.

More evidence that this report is just for marketing purposes.  31% success rate is not very impressive either.

31% wouldnt be, I think we agree,  but the 60-80% that these programs see as success rates is pretty good.

check out the study:

Residential Treatment Outcome-Study



...

[Troll Control]

I found this interesting.

More evidence that this report is just for marketing purposes.  31% success rate is not very impressive either.

This thread is about Behrens' study.  You keep referencing a group of studies by other researchers.  Start a new thread if you want and post their work.  Here we're talking about Behrens and Aspen.  What are you trying to hide by not using proper attribution to the authors, Whooter?  Even Behrens cited them properly, but not you. :beat:

You can comment on this if you like.  It's right on topic.  But you probably won't, lols.

[Whooter]

Along with the 60-80% success rate:


The majority of adolescents were treated for multiple problems (85.5%). The most frequent treatment foci were disruptive
behavior disorders (44%), substance use disorders (36%), and mood disorder (31%) (percentages
did not total 100% because participants could have more than one problem).

So 85.5% of the kids were there for multiple reasons and 8% of the kids the program felt would not be successful and they were discharged early.



...

[DannyB II]

Whooter,

Glad to see you back at work, hope you have a successful day. Stay out of the pot holes.

danny

[Whooter]

It appears that more girls recovered to the normal range than boys did.  Take a look:

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

The majority of male adolescents (66%) reported symptoms at
discharge that qualified them as “recovered” because their scores exceeded the cut-off score (raw
score 44). In other words, by the point of discharge the majority of males reported symptoms that
were more comparable to the normal population than to the clinical population.



...

[Troll Control]

Along with the 60-80% success rate:


...

Why do you keep lying, Whooter?  Just because you lost the argument doesn't mean you should baltantly lie to try to cover up that fact.

60-80% success rate is not part of Behrens' work.  It's from other studies she referenced done by other researchers.  Why do you fail to cite this properly, Whooter?  Why do you mix this in with Behrens' work as if it is hers?  

You are really desperate at this point.  That fiduciary interest in Aspen must be weighing heavy on you now since the programs Behrens studied have been charged with abuse and killing kids and the Ed Cons are onto the scam and cutting off referrals.