Intervention studies for bereaved individuals often recruited participants without regard to symptom status and used supportive interventions.46, 47 A recent meta - analysis of bereavement support interventions showed an effect size of 0.15.48 However, 2 earlier studies49, 50 examined efficacy of an exposure - based treatment for individuals considered to have pathological grief and showed
significant treatment effects on measures of anxiety and depression.
For completers (N = 201), repeated measure ANOVAs revealed
significant treatment effects for Perceived Stress with a post-test effect size (ES) = 0.71, women were consistently higher on stress.
«We measured many aspects of social ability and
found significant treatment effects on social cognition, social interaction and social communication in youth with autism,» Corbett said.
We estimated models by using dependent variables previously associated with
significant treatment effects in the follow - up study.10, 20 These included life - course outcomes for the mother, such as number of subsequent children, months on welfare, impairments due to substance use, and number of arrests, as well as life - course outcomes for the study children, such as number of runaway episodes and number of arrests or convictions.
Pretest to 30 - day follow - up analyses
indicated significant treatment effects on parent - reported discipline style (Parenting Scale, Adolescent version), child behavior (Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory), and on social cognitive theory constructs of intentions and self - efficacy.
Results indicate that compared with the other conditions,
significant treatment effects in the EMDR condition were obtained at posttreatment on a number of self - report, psychometric, and standardized interview measures.
No significant treatment effect was seen for average office blood pressure, and no significant treatment effect was evident for any of the secondary outcomes (24 - hour blood pressure, arterial stiffness, endothelial function, cholesterol level, glucose level, and walking distance), according to study results.
As early as 4 weeks into treatment, 21 % in the guselkumab group had
a significant treatment effect on ACR20 response, compared to zero in the placebo group (p < 0.001).
Patients in MCS (n = 30; interval 43 ± 63 months; 19 traumatic, 11 non-traumatic) showed
a significant treatment effect (p = 0.003) as measured by CRS - R total scores.
Overall, there were
no significant treatment effects, and treatment effects did not differ across lesson type.
No significant treatment effects were found for observed parenting behaviors.
When compared to ratings gathered before the STP, there was
a significant treatment effect.
The third major question, measured by the Family Environment Scales, showed
no significant treatment effect for any of the variables measured.
Results of the first major question, measured by The Parent Attitude Survey Scale, showed
a significant treatment effect was apparent for the variables of causation, understanding, acceptance and trust.
The second major question, measured by the Child Behavior Checklist, showed
no significant treatment effects for this variable.
Results showed that Defiant Children produced
no significant treatment effects; however, many parents assigned to the Defiant Children condition did not attend or attended erratically.
There were
no significant treatment effects for children's crying, screaming, or negative emoting.