Table 2.
N = 65 | Count | % | CFIR domain |
---|---|---|---|
Perceived advantages of using TN | |||
Child is better able to process their trauma | 22 | 34 | Int |
Child learns to identify and address cognitive distortions | 15 | 23 | Int |
Reduction in trauma symptoms | 10 | 15 | Int |
Allows for gradual exposure to trauma | 10 | 15 | Int |
Client and therapist gain sense of mastery/empowerment over trauma | 9 | 14 | Int |
Parents able to provide support | 8 | 12 | OS |
Reduction in child avoidance | 7 | 11 | Int |
Perceived disadvantages of using TN | |||
None | 16 | 25 | -- |
Negative caregiver reactions | 11 | 17 | OS |
Increase/worsening of client symptoms | 10 | 15 | Int |
Notes: Count and percentage refer to the number of participants who endorsed each answer. Percentages may sum to more than 100% because participants could list multiple answers. All beliefs are inclusive to the “individuals involved” CFIR domain. We also mapped these beliefs onto other potential CFIR domains with which they are associated.
Abbreviations: Int intervention (i.e., features of intervention), IS inner setting (i.e., organizational culture and climate), OS outer setting (i.e., political and social climate; includes family characteristics); Ind characteristics of individuals (i.e., therapists’ knowledge and beliefs), IP implementation process (e.g., planning, engagement)