Using measurement-based and feedback-informed approaches is key to providing effective family-centered clinical care; a strength-based approach is shown to improve treatment outcomes and satisfaction. Yet, there are few brief, psychometrically sound assessment tools for preschool-aged and elementary school–aged children. In response, we developed a nine-item, two-scale measure, the Weekly Assessment of Child Behavior–Positive (WACB-P), suitable for children aged 2 to 12 years. We examined the psychometric properties of the WACB-P based on two low-income, clinical samples differing in intervention modality and location (Sample 1: N = 285; Sample 2: N = 137). WACB-P demonstrated high internal validity and test–retest reliability. The item response theory (IRT) paradigm applied to the Intensity Scale revealed that the items showed moderate discrimination and adequate precision, particularly effectively capturing behavioral challenges. Repeated-measures analysis of covariance (RM-ANCOVA) showed significant linear effects from session to session, suggesting sensitivity to change during treatment. WACB-P demonstrated strong convergent validity with established measures of child behavior problems. These favorable results position the WACB-P as a suitable choice for agencies providing measurement-based behavioral health care for young children and their families.

Recent dimensional models of adversity informed by a neurobiological deficit framework highlights threat and deprivation as core dimensions, whereas models informed by an evolutionary, adaptational and functional framework calls attention to harshness and unpredictability. This report seeks to evaluate an integrative model of threat, deprivation, and unpredictability, drawing on the Fragile Families Study. Confirmatory factor analysis of presumed multiple indicators of each construct reveals an adequate three-factor structure of adversity. Theory-based targeted predictions of the developmental sequelae of each dimension also received empirical support, with deprivation linked to health problems and cognitive ability; threat linked to aggression; and unpredictability to substance use and sexual risk-taking. These findings lend credibility to utility of the three-dimensional integrative framework of adversity. It could thus inform development of dimensional measures of risk assessment and exploration of multidimensional adversity profiles, sensitive to individual differences in lived experiences, supporting patient-centered, strength-based approaches to services.

Research shows that parenting interventions struggle with keeping clients in treatment. The purpose of this study was to compare attrition and rates of improvement in caregiver-child dyads participating in either Parent–Child Care (PC–CARE), a brief, 7-session parenting intervention or Parent–Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) over a 7–week period. Participants were 204 caregiver-child dyads referred to either PC-CARE (N = 69) or PCIT (N = 135) between 2016 and 2019. Children were aged 2–7 years, referred for treatment by county Behavioral Health Services, and Medicaid funded. Findings showed that PC–CARE participants were 2.5 times more likely than PCIT participants to complete 7 sessions, all other things being equal, and showed significantly greater rates of improvement during this timeframe in reported child behavior problems and parenting stress. In conclusion, compared with PCIT, PC–CARE showed greater retention and rate of improvement in child and parent outcomes over a comparable time period.

No abstract