Assessment Practices of Child Clinicians: Results From a National Survey

Jonathan R. Cook, Estee M. Hausman, Amanda Doss, Kristin M. Hawley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Assessment is an integral component of treatment. However, prior surveys indicate clinicians may not use standardized assessment strategies. We surveyed 1,510 clinicians and used multivariate analysis of variance to explore group differences in specific measure use. Clinicians used unstandardized measures more frequently than standardized measures, although psychologists used standardized measures more frequently than nonpsychologists. We also used latent profile analysis to classify clinicians based on their overall approach to assessment and examined associations between clinician-level variables and assessment class or profile membership. A four-profile model best fit the data. The largest profile consisted of clinicians who primarily used unstandardized assessments (76.7%), followed by broad-spectrum assessors who regularly use both standardized and unstandardized assessment (11.9%), and two smaller profiles of minimal (6.0%) and selective assessors (5.5%). Compared with broad-spectrum assessors, unstandardized and minimal assessors were less likely to report having adequate standardized measures training. Implications for clinical practice and training are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)210-221
Number of pages12
JournalAssessment
Volume24
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2017

Fingerprint

Analysis of Variance
Multivariate Analysis
Psychology
Therapeutics
Surveys and Questionnaires

Keywords

  • assessment
  • clinician survey
  • standardized measures

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Psychology
  • Applied Psychology

Cite this

Assessment Practices of Child Clinicians : Results From a National Survey. / Cook, Jonathan R.; Hausman, Estee M.; Doss, Amanda; Hawley, Kristin M.

In: Assessment, Vol. 24, No. 2, 01.03.2017, p. 210-221.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Cook, Jonathan R. ; Hausman, Estee M. ; Doss, Amanda ; Hawley, Kristin M. / Assessment Practices of Child Clinicians : Results From a National Survey. In: Assessment. 2017 ; Vol. 24, No. 2. pp. 210-221.
@article{9b7f9ebc3ebc4d5d831d926744a4f096,
title = "Assessment Practices of Child Clinicians: Results From a National Survey",
abstract = "Assessment is an integral component of treatment. However, prior surveys indicate clinicians may not use standardized assessment strategies. We surveyed 1,510 clinicians and used multivariate analysis of variance to explore group differences in specific measure use. Clinicians used unstandardized measures more frequently than standardized measures, although psychologists used standardized measures more frequently than nonpsychologists. We also used latent profile analysis to classify clinicians based on their overall approach to assessment and examined associations between clinician-level variables and assessment class or profile membership. A four-profile model best fit the data. The largest profile consisted of clinicians who primarily used unstandardized assessments (76.7{\%}), followed by broad-spectrum assessors who regularly use both standardized and unstandardized assessment (11.9{\%}), and two smaller profiles of minimal (6.0{\%}) and selective assessors (5.5{\%}). Compared with broad-spectrum assessors, unstandardized and minimal assessors were less likely to report having adequate standardized measures training. Implications for clinical practice and training are discussed.",
keywords = "assessment, clinician survey, standardized measures",
author = "Cook, {Jonathan R.} and Hausman, {Estee M.} and Amanda Doss and Hawley, {Kristin M.}",
year = "2017",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1073191115604353",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "24",
pages = "210--221",
journal = "Assessment",
issn = "1073-1911",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Assessment Practices of Child Clinicians

T2 - Results From a National Survey

AU - Cook, Jonathan R.

AU - Hausman, Estee M.

AU - Doss, Amanda

AU - Hawley, Kristin M.

PY - 2017/3/1

Y1 - 2017/3/1

N2 - Assessment is an integral component of treatment. However, prior surveys indicate clinicians may not use standardized assessment strategies. We surveyed 1,510 clinicians and used multivariate analysis of variance to explore group differences in specific measure use. Clinicians used unstandardized measures more frequently than standardized measures, although psychologists used standardized measures more frequently than nonpsychologists. We also used latent profile analysis to classify clinicians based on their overall approach to assessment and examined associations between clinician-level variables and assessment class or profile membership. A four-profile model best fit the data. The largest profile consisted of clinicians who primarily used unstandardized assessments (76.7%), followed by broad-spectrum assessors who regularly use both standardized and unstandardized assessment (11.9%), and two smaller profiles of minimal (6.0%) and selective assessors (5.5%). Compared with broad-spectrum assessors, unstandardized and minimal assessors were less likely to report having adequate standardized measures training. Implications for clinical practice and training are discussed.

AB - Assessment is an integral component of treatment. However, prior surveys indicate clinicians may not use standardized assessment strategies. We surveyed 1,510 clinicians and used multivariate analysis of variance to explore group differences in specific measure use. Clinicians used unstandardized measures more frequently than standardized measures, although psychologists used standardized measures more frequently than nonpsychologists. We also used latent profile analysis to classify clinicians based on their overall approach to assessment and examined associations between clinician-level variables and assessment class or profile membership. A four-profile model best fit the data. The largest profile consisted of clinicians who primarily used unstandardized assessments (76.7%), followed by broad-spectrum assessors who regularly use both standardized and unstandardized assessment (11.9%), and two smaller profiles of minimal (6.0%) and selective assessors (5.5%). Compared with broad-spectrum assessors, unstandardized and minimal assessors were less likely to report having adequate standardized measures training. Implications for clinical practice and training are discussed.

KW - assessment

KW - clinician survey

KW - standardized measures

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85011854012&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85011854012&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1073191115604353

DO - 10.1177/1073191115604353

M3 - Article

C2 - 26341574

AN - SCOPUS:85011854012

VL - 24

SP - 210

EP - 221

JO - Assessment

JF - Assessment

SN - 1073-1911

IS - 2

ER -