Fortunately, conducting randomized
trials over the decades,
intervention researchers have produced numerous manual - guided, evidence - based treatments (EBTs) for depression, anxiety, and conduct in youth.2 Unfortunately, these treatments have not been incorporated into most everyday
clinical practice.3 - 5 A common view is that the complexity and comorbidity of many clinically referred youths, whose problems and treatment needs can shift
during treatment, may pose problems for EBT protocols, which are typically designed for single or homogeneous clusters of disorders, developed and tested with recruited youths who differ from patients seen in everyday
clinical practice, and involve a predetermined sequence of prescribed session contents, limiting their flexibility.3 - 8 Indeed,
trials testing these protocols against usual care for young patients in
clinical practice have produced mixed findings, with EBTs often failing to outperform usual care.7, 9
This study uses data from the
Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness on sociodemograhic characteristics, baseline clinical status, and service use among patients diagnosed with schizophrenia to prospectively identify predictors of CJS involvement during the followi
Clinical Antipsychotic
Trials of
Intervention Effectiveness on sociodemograhic characteristics, baseline
clinical status, and service use among patients diagnosed with schizophrenia to prospectively identify predictors of CJS involvement during the followi
clinical status, and service use among patients diagnosed with schizophrenia to prospectively identify predictors of CJS involvement
during the following year.