Table 2.
Training condition, consultation participation, and training outcomes in original sample and follow-up sample
| Variable |
Overall sample |
2-year follow-up |
|---|---|---|
|
(Beidas et al.,[6]; |
Sample |
|
| N = 115) | (N = 50) | |
| |
n (%) |
n (%) |
| Training Condition |
|
|
| Routine Training |
41 (36%) |
22 (44%) |
| Computer Training |
34 (30%) |
15 (30%) |
| Augmented Training |
40 (35%) |
13 (26%) |
| Trained to Skill Criterion |
|
|
| Baseline |
32 (28%) |
19 (38%) |
| Post-training |
73 (65%) |
34 (68%) |
| Post-consultation |
87 (85%) |
41 (82%) |
| Trained to Adherence Criterion |
|
|
| Baseline |
7 (6%) |
3 (6%) |
| Post-training |
43 (38%) |
23 (46%) |
| Post-consultation |
62 (61%) |
29 (58%) |
| |
M (SD) |
M (SD) |
| Consultation session attendance* | 7.2 (3.2) | 8.24 (2.26) |
Note. Trained to criterion in skill equaled receiving a skill rating of 3.5 out 7 during a performance-based behavioral rehearsal. Trained to criterion in adherence equaled delivering 70% of cognitive-behavioral therapy components for youth anxiety during a performance-based behavioral rehearsal.
*Significant difference found between follow-up participants and non-participants.