We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Charles S. Mansueto, Behavior Therapy Center of Greater Washington, Maryland,Suzanne Mouton-Odum, Psychology Houston, PC - The Center for Cognitive Behavioral Treatment, Texas,Ruth Goldfinger Golomb, Behavior Therapy Center of Greater Washington, Maryland
The importance of Chapter 6 is underlined in Chapter 7 in which the selection and implementation of specific interventions are described. In Chapter 7, Emily’s case illustration is the focus, with detailed descriptions of her use of various specific interventions until she and her therapist home in on an effective array of treatment components derived from all five SCAMP domains. Also illustrated, is the flexibility of ComB treatment in addressing broader life circumstances that provide challenges for the maintenance of effective treatment. The importance of lifestyle changes that enhance and bolster ComB treatment is emphasized.
Charles S. Mansueto, Behavior Therapy Center of Greater Washington, Maryland,Suzanne Mouton-Odum, Psychology Houston, PC - The Center for Cognitive Behavioral Treatment, Texas,Ruth Goldfinger Golomb, Behavior Therapy Center of Greater Washington, Maryland
In this chapter, the reader is guided through processes of assessment of BFRBs and the functional analysis that underlies and guides ComB treatment for each client. Standardized BFRB assessment instruments are presented along with ComB-specific assessment forms developed by the authors. Guidance is provided in utilizing awareness-raising techniques, such as self-monitoring and recording, that are designed to enhance the client’s focus on details about their picking or pulling that are crucial for designing an individualized and comprehensive ComB treatment plan. The critical functional analysis is described in detail, copiously illustrated with an in-depth case illustration provided to detail the SCAMP-based functional analytic approach. Forms are provided to aid readers in performing the functional analysis in preparation for ensuing chapters that describe the treatment intervention process.
Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Draft Guidance for Industry on pharmaceutical REMS (Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies) assessment and survey methodology highlights physician knowledge–attitudes–behaviors (KAB) surveys as regulatory science tools. This mixed-methods evaluation advances regulatory science and the assessment of FDA REMS programs when using physician surveys. We: (1) reviewed published physician survey response rates; and (2) assessed response bias in a simulation study of secondary survey data using different accrual cut-off strategies.
Methods:
A systematic literature review was conducted of US physician surveys (2000–2014) on pharmaceutical use (n = 75). Kruskal–Wallis tests were used to examine the relationships between response rates and survey design characteristics. The simulation was conducted using secondary data from a population-based physician KAB survey on diabetes risk management with antipsychotic use in Missouri Medicaid (n = 973 accrued over 30 weeks). Survey item responses were compared using Pearson’s chi-square tests for two faster completion simulations: Fixed Sample (n = 300) and Fixed Time (8 weeks).
Results:
Survey response rates ranged from 7% to 100% (median = 48%, IQR = 34%–68%). Surveys of targeted populations and surveys using member lists were associated with higher response rates (p = 0.02). In the simulation, 9 of 20 (45%) KAB items, including diabetes screening advocacy, differed significantly using the smaller Fixed Sample strategy (achieved in 12 days) versus full accrual. Fewer response differences were found using the Fixed Time strategy (2 of 20 [10%] items).
Conclusions:
Published data on physician surveys report low response rates with most associated with the sample source selected. FDA REMS assessments should include formal evaluation of survey accrual and response bias.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.