Skip to main content
. 2023 Jun 14;48(6):523–536. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/jsad032

Table II.

Comparison of Stepped-Care COVID-19 Feasibility and Adherence to Previous Full Program Implementation Pilot Data

Stepped-care COVID-19 feasibility (current study) COVID-19 feasibility (Williams et al., 2022) Pre-COVID-19 feasibility (Burek et al., 2021)
Recruitment period 15 months 11 months 7 months
 Range January 2021–March 2022 March 2020–January 2021 July 2019–January 2020
Referralsa 100 40 47
 Eligible 95 35 47
 Declined 12 (lack of time = 6) 4 (lack of time = 2) 9 (lack of time = 5)
 Requested delay 0 (0%) 7 (17.5%) 0 (0%)
 Lost to follow-up 15 (16%) 2 (5%) 15 (31%)
 Consent and enrolledb 68 (72%) 22 (63%) 23 (49%)
Intervention completion status
 Withdrew before intervention started 8 (12%) 4 (18%) 1 (4%)
 Withdrew after intervention started 0 (0%) 6 (27%) 1 (4%)
 Completed entire interventionb,c 52 (87%) 12 (67%) 19 (86%)
Time to completion, weeks M (SD) Step 1: 4.3 (3.7) 10.7 (4.16) 10.0 (3.11)
Step 2: 6.8 (2.7)
Step 3: 8.0 (2.2)
Steps 2 + 3 (all 7 sessions): 8.9 (6.6)
a

Greater number of stepped-care referrals in comparison to past recruitment periods is due to the addition of the POND Network in referral population.

b

Comparative analyses were calculated for consent [χ2(2) = 7.00, p = .030] and completion rates [χ2(1) = 3.89, p = .048] using Chi-square analyses. Statistically significant differences are bolded.

c

Across feasibility studies, samples were comparable in parent education, heritage culture, parent participating, parent age, and child age. Due to the addition of the POND neurodevelopmental disability research cohort, participants in the current study had significantly greater males and ADHD/ASD diagnoses in comparison to past implementation samples.