Couple variables predicting retention in a brief intervention and research

Abstract

Therapy is an effective form of treatment for couple distress; yet, research shows that 20%-60% of couples terminate treatment prematurely. Predictors of couple retention in therapy and research are unclear, particularly for couples from marginalized populations, which has important implications for the quality and generalizability of research results, and the benefits derived from therapy are limited when participants are not retained. The purpose of this study (N = 1310) was to identify couple-level

A special section: Recruiting and retaining couples from underrepresented backgrounds in intervention research

“…Recent research has specifically examined variables associated with recruitment and retention rates in couple research. In a study of couple‐level variables associated with retention in a two‐session couple intervention and follow‐up research, findings showed that couples were less likely to be retained if at least one partner identified as Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, or Hispanic (Mitchell et al, 2022). Further, a study on the transition to parenthood with ethnically minoritized couples with low‐income reported an 11% recruitment rate and a 36% retention rate in the intervention group (Baucom et al, 2018).…”

Brief relationship support as a selective suicide prevention intervention: Piloting the Relationship Checkup in veteran couples with relationship and mental health concerns

“…More recently, studies have suggested RC may have secondary mental health benefits such as depression reductions up to 6 months after treatment (Cigrang et al, 2022; Gray et al, 2020; Mitchell et al, 2023). This reflects the benefits of longer‐form generic couple therapies seen for PTSD (Monson et al, 2012).…”

Evidence and couple and family therapy

“…This issue of Family Process includes several papers related to evidence and the practice of couple and family therapy. In this editorial, I call attention to two papers by Lorås et al (2023); Whittaker et al (2023), and a special section in this issue focused on expanding the representativeness of research about couple therapy (Mitchell & Gordon, 2023).…”

“…How, in fact, does one get to more inclusiveness in research (and more broadly in couple therapy itself)? Our special section features several papers that help imagine how inclusiveness can be expanded—some from examining efforts in the context of research (Mitchell et al, 2023; Whitton et al, 2023) and others from reimagining how to present couple intervention (Daire et al, 2023; Williamson et al, 2023). Certainly, it is an essential task to ask how to enable better recruitment and participation by a wider range of people in couple therapy research.…”

“…Certainly, it is an essential task to ask how to enable better recruitment and participation by a wider range of people in couple therapy research. Mitchell and Gordon in their section provide clues to how such research might move forward and offer in their introductory article (Mitchell & Gordon, 2023), a clear set of actionable recommendations, which can help reduce the questions about inclusiveness and representativeness raised about this research.…”