For children and adolescents facing multiple stressors, identifying promising and targeted interventions to enhance their resilience is particularly crucial. Although the overall effect size of this study is small, its clinical efficacy may be influenced by population characteristics and intervention implementation. On the one hand, the differential efficacy of SBIs may be due to different health challenges or school environments experienced by children and adolescents. Although this study was unable to identify the sources of heterogeneity in the pooled results through meta-regression and subgroup analyses, this heterogeneity may reflect differences in population characteristics and intervention implementation. Implementing interventions within the school environment can effectively reduce various barriers, including family financial burdens, caregiver burdens, transportation needs, and limited insurance coverage, without requiring significant additional time and human resources. Globally, 10—20% of children and adolescents are experiencing mental health issues (88), and only a minority of these children and adolescents have access to medical-level care due to limited medical resources.
The multilevel implementation quality framework
As described in the next section, ideally this model is standardized and specified for the intervention and the support system in terms of core elements and the delivery model. There is tremendous variation between interventions in terms of the risk factors at which they are aimed, the targets of the interventions (individuals, systems, the environment, for example), and the methods through which they operate. Implementation quality is the discrepancy between what is planned and what is actually delivered when an intervention is conducted, so it is necessary to specify the model against which actual practice will be measured. Given the focus on implementation quality as the outcome of interest, it is positioned at the center of the proposed model. These contextual factors may have more or less importance depending on the stage of implementation or diffusion (program adoption, implementation, or institutionalization) (Fixsen et al, 2005).
School-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports and students with extensive support needs: a scoping review
- For the selection of the reported result, 20 studies were assessed as having some concerns or high risk due to multiple eligible outcome measurements within the outcome domain, while the remaining studies as being of low risk.
- Duration and proportion scores for pre-implementation and implementation activities were examined.
- Researchers from all six studies explored the availability and accessibility of Tier 1 support for students with ESN.
Examining the central construct of mindfulness itself is also important to determine if the development of mindfulness is what leads to the positive changes that have been observed (Shapiro et al., 2006). This leads to poor student–teacher relationships, which could affect students’ learning and achievement (Herman et al., 2018). For example, 40% of studies in this review did not provide details about participant race and ethnicity, which is important given the underrepresentation of racial and ethnic populations in rigorous trials of MBIs (Waldron et al., 2018). A third limitation of studies included in this review was the lack of reporting of participant characteristics.
PBIS
We anticipate that findings from our systematic review would contribute to the literature by providing evidence-based recommendations to clinicians, educators, and school-based researchers on which specific outcomes can be reliably targeted with MBSIs. To address the growing interest in MBSIs and to inform those choosing programs, we systematically reviewed published studies of MBSIs for youth in schools (cf. Felver et al., 2016; Zenner et al., 2014). Since these reviews either collapsed all studies together or looked at RCT only, none of the reviews systematically considered the quality of evidence both across study designs and within RCTs.
Schools in disadvantaged neighborhoods may experience greater staff turnover, which undermines the ability to sustain a workforce trained to implement preventive interventions. Studies have linked positive school climate with student achievement and behavioral adjustment (Bryk & Schnieder, 2002; Esposito, 1999). Organizational health, or an organization’s ability to adapt to challenges over time, is an important indicator of school climate (Bevans et al, 2007; Hoy et al, 1998). Research on school https://www.nj.gov/education/esser/arp/ climate often focuses on the social or psychological aspect of the construct, and includes measuring student, staff, and/or parent perceptions of interpersonal exchanges (for example open, trusting, respectful) between members of the school community (Bryk & Schneider, 2002). Distinctions between culture and climate have been proposed as important to consider in schools as well (Hoy et al, 1998; Owens, 2004; Van Houtte, 2005).
