Behavior ProblemsPhase 2/3NCT00880126
Community Development Teams to Scale-Up Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care (MTFC) in California
A Phase 2/3 study testing Community Development Teams in people with Behavior Problems, run by Center for Research to Practice.
Trial summary
The effects of using Community Development Teams to increase the number of counties that successfully implement and sustain Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care programs is studied in a randomized trial in 40 California counties. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Behavior Problems
- What is being tested?
- Community Development Teams
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 350 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Sep 2006to Aug 2011
- Phase
- Phase 2/3
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Non-early adopters of evidence-based practice (MTFC)
Who cannot join
- Placed fewer than 6 youth per year in group care
About this study
Official title: Community Development Teams to Scale-Up MTFC in California
The effects of using Community Development Teams to increase the number of counties that successfully implement and sustain Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care programs is studied in a randomized trial in 40 California counties. MTFC is an alternative to group or residential placement for youth with severe conduct and emotional problems referred from the juvenile justice and child welfare systems.
- Conditions
- Behavior Problems
- Being tested
- Community Development Teams
- Keywords
- Individualized Implementation, Community Development Teams
- Medical subject headings
- Mental Disorders
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Community Development TeamsBehavioural
CDTs bring together counties who are implementing a new practice
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| CDT | Experimental | Community Development Teams bring together counties who are implementing a new practice Receives: Behavioral: Community Development Teams |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Implementation of an evidence-based practice in counties
Measured: 5 years
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 Apr 2009 (estimated)
- Study startSep 2006
- Primary completionAug 2011 (estimated)
- Study completionAug 2011 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (3)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Behavior ProblemsStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 2/3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 350 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Center for Research to Practice
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00880126
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- R01MH076158
- Status last verified
- Feb 2009
- First submitted
- 9 Apr 2009
- Last updated
- 13 Apr 2009
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Brown CH, Chamberlain P, Saldana L, Padgett C, Wang W, Cruden G. Evaluation of two implementation strategies in 51 child county public service systems in two states: results of a cluster randomized head-to-head implementation trial. Implement Sci. 2014 Oct 14;9:134. doi: 10.1186/s13012-014-0134-8.
PubMed 25312005Palinkas LA, Holloway IW, Rice E, Brown CH, Valente TW, Chamberlain P. Influence network linkages across implementation strategy conditions in a randomized controlled trial of two strategies for scaling up evidence-based practices in public youth-serving systems. Implement Sci. 2013 Nov 14;8:133. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-133.
PubMed 24229373Palinkas LA, Holloway IW, Rice E, Fuentes D, Wu Q, Chamberlain P. Social networks and implementation of evidence-based practices in public youth-serving systems: a mixed-methods study. Implement Sci. 2011 Sep 29;6:113. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-113.
PubMed 21958674
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 13 Apr 2009. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Community Development Teams to Scale-Up MTFC in California
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00880126
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- R01MH076158
- Conditions
- Behavior Problems
- Keywords
- Individualized Implementation, Community Development Teams
- Phase
- Phase 2/3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 350 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Center for Research to PracticeUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Sep 2006
- Primary completion
- Aug 2011 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Aug 2011 (estimated)
- First posted
- 13 Apr 2009 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The effects of using Community Development Teams to increase the number of counties that successfully implement and sustain Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care programs is studied in a randomized trial in 40 California counties. MTFC is an alternative to group or residential placement for youth with severe conduct and emotional problems referred from the juvenile justice and child welfare systems.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| CDT | Experimental | Behavioral: Community Development TeamsCommunity Development Teams bring together counties who are implementing a new practice |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Non-early adopters of evidence-based practice (MTFC)
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Placed fewer than 6 youth per year in group care
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Community Development TeamsCDTs bring together counties who are implementing a new practice | Behavioural | CDT |
Primary outcome
Implementation of an evidence-based practice in counties
Time frame: 5 years
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 13 Apr 2009.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 25312005Brown CH, Chamberlain P, Saldana L, Padgett C, Wang W, Cruden G. Evaluation of two implementation strategies in 51 child county public service systems in two states: results of a cluster randomized head-to-head implementation trial. Implement Sci. 2014 Oct 14;9:134. doi: 10.1186/s13012-014-0134-8.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 24229373Palinkas LA, Holloway IW, Rice E, Brown CH, Valente TW, Chamberlain P. Influence network linkages across implementation strategy conditions in a randomized controlled trial of two strategies for scaling up evidence-based practices in public youth-serving systems. Implement Sci. 2013 Nov 14;8:133. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-133.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 21958674Palinkas LA, Holloway IW, Rice E, Fuentes D, Wu Q, Chamberlain P. Social networks and implementation of evidence-based practices in public youth-serving systems: a mixed-methods study. Implement Sci. 2011 Sep 29;6:113. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-113.
Related trials for Behavior Problems
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Lisdexamfetamine For the Treatment of Conduct Disorder in Children
Conduct Disorder
Active, not recruiting
Intervention to Address Disparate Mental Health Consequences of COVID-19 Pandemic on Latinx and African Newcomers
Mental Health Issue, Mental Health Disorder
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study to Evaluate the Long-term Safety and Tolerability of Xanomeline and Trospium Chloride for the Treatment of Psychiatric Disorders in Children and Adolescents
Schizophrenia, Autism-Related Irritability
Not yet recruiting
Study of Psychoeducation and Reading for Kids (SPARK)
Reading Difficulties, Behavioral Problems
RecruitingObservational study
Student Precarity and Psychiatry
Depressive Disorder, Major, Generalized Anxiety Disorder
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 2/3 study testing Community Development Teams in people with Behavior Problems, run by Center for Research to Practice.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 13 Apr 2009. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this combined phase mean?
Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Implementation of an evidence-based practice in counties (time frame: 5 years). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00880126, which also lists 3 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 13 Apr 2009.