Training In Pediatric Psychology Research Articles

Commentary: Goldilocks Revisited: Do We Need More Practice Competencies in Pediatric Psychology?

The publication of the Thompson et al. competencies framework for pediatric palliative care marks a third set of practice guidelines published. There is essential tension between specialist training in clinical child psychology (our "home" discipline) leading to further subspecialty training in pediatric psychology, the desired balance between the two, and impact on teaching, training, and patient care. A purpose of this invited commentary is to stimulate further awareness and subsequent discussion of the integration of more narrow practice skills in a growing and developing field, as the tendency toward greater specialization and siloed practice increases.

Optimizing Medical-Legal Partnerships in Pediatric Psychology to Reduce Health Disparities.

To provide a topical review of the literature on the use of medical-legal partnerships (MLPs) to address social determinants of health (SDH) needs as a means to reduce health disparities, and to make recommendations for the implementation of MLPs within pediatric psychologists' clinical work, research, and training. We conducted a topical review of the research on the intersection of MLPs, SDH needs, and health disparities among pediatric populations. Given the scarcity of literature available, both empirical and theoretical articles were included in the review. Though limited, the extant literature suggests that use of MLPs may help address the SDH needs that perpetuate disparities among pediatric populations. To date, MLPs are not as frequently incorporated in the training and work of pediatric psychologists as they may be in other related fields (e.g., medicine). MLPs provide an opportunity for psychologists to broaden their interdisciplinary collaborations, to more aptly meet the social and legal needs of their patients to assist in reducing inequities among underserved pediatric populations. The systematic incorporation of MLPs into pediatric psychology training may help to increase the utilization of these services moving forward.

Integrating Board Certification Expectations and Examination Practice Into Clinical Child and Pediatric Psychology Training Programs

ABSTRACTRecent trends in the field suggest that it may be an ideal time for clinical psychology training programs to consider integrating American Board of Professional Psychology certification components into their training programs. Training programs are already required to evaluate and document trainees’ competencies, and the field of clinical psychology is increasing its emphasis on board certification. Nonetheless, the process of board certification appears daunting and anxiety provoking to both recent and experienced professionals. Providing trainees with experience in board certification experiences is likely to increase their skill and comfort with case presentations, writing professional statements, and oral examinations. Experience in programs with this approach suggests that these components can be utilized to evaluate competencies with minimal to moderate increases in time commitments from both faculty and trainees. Further research evaluating strategies to increase trainees’ participation and success with board certification is warranted.

Commentary: Dennis D. Drotar Distinguished Research Award: Reflections on People and Contexts Influencing a Research Career

Journal of Pediatric Psychology Advance Access published September 16, 2015 Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 2015, 1–7 doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/jsv089 Commentary Commentary: Dennis D. Drotar Distinguished Research Award: Reflections on People and Contexts Influencing a Research Career Jan L. Wallander, P H D All correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Jan L. Wallander, P H D, Psychological Sciences, University of California, Merced, 5200 North Lake Road, Merced, CA 95340, USA. E-mail: jwallander@ucmerced.edu Received August 4, 2015; revisions received August 18, 2015; accepted August 19, 2015 I am deeply honored to receive the 2015 Dennis D. Drotar Distinguished Research Award by the Society of Pediatric Psychology (SPP). Indeed, I am humbled that my colleagues believed that my research contribu- tions are worthy of this award, named after probably the most impactful and productive pediatric psychol- ogy researcher in our history. Given that I suspect that the SPP Executive Committee made this decision based on my career contribution, I want to take this opportunity to reflect over my career (but please note, albeit 30þ years in the making, it is not over yet), not only in terms of what I did, but what influenced its evolution. It is not that I think my career path represents the model for achieving some success, even if success can be uniformly defined. Rather, there are numerous paths that can lead to success in a research career, but the direction I followed likely represents a less obvious one. That is, the prototypical research career path is one devoted to a relatively narrowly defined issue or problem, which is doggedly pursued through study af- ter study, evolving over years. This is certainly a most admirable path, because when well done, it is likely to lead to clarity of understanding about that issue and well-recognized expertise and accolades for the researcher. However, my path cannot be defined by strategic pursuit of a well-articulated goal. The major reason for this, aside probably from my easily getting bored, is that my research development has been largely influ- enced by the people and contexts I encountered. Today, I define my research as focused on the quality of life (QOL) of vulnerable children, but this distilla- tion evolved over my career. Early People and Contexts I spent my formative years, as they say, growing up in Sweden. As a bastion of equality and solidarity, this undoubtedly influenced my turning my research in more recent years toward the incredible injustice we see in the disparities in QOL, health, and well-being among different groups of children (to which I will re- turn later). I came to the United States as an exchange student in High School and later returned to Ashland, Ohio to attend Ashland University. There I was extremely fortunate to be taken under the wing of probably the only research-intensive pro- fessor at this small liberal arts college, Aaron Roy. Gratefully, I know that without him entering my life at that time, I would not be where I am today. Somehow, spending 3 years in a dark room running his rats through mazes instilled in me a passion for the research enterprise. And experiencing what he did on a daily basis, as well as the broader learning environ- ment of an American college, led to my discovery, “Wow, you can get paid to be a life-long student.” Consequently, I wanted to become a professor, which in my view is the best job ever. I would choose this ca- reer over again, without a doubt. Fortunately one (and only one) PhD program saw some potential in me, bringing me to Purdue University. Even though this was a hotbed in the 1970s for pediatric psychology training, I had absolutely no interest in this, indeed I had no professional interest in children. Yet, around me were fellow graduate stu- dents, such as Annette La Greca, Michael Roberts, and others, who embraced this new area and, unknowingly, left some positive trace in my brain associated with C The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Pediatric Psychology. V All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com Downloaded from http://jpepsy.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of California, Merced on September 17, 2015 Psychological Sciences and Health Sciences Research Center, University of California, Merced

Going above and beyond: Exemplar diversity training in pediatric psychology.

Diversity and health disparities have been highlighted as 1 of the 10 core crosscutting knowledge competencies for pediatric psychology training. Specifics about the actual implementation and integration of diversity training across various types of pediatric psychology programs are largely unknown. We surveyed program directors of graduate and predoctoral internship programs listed on the Society of Pediatric Psychology website (N 103) about their diversity training experiences that went above and beyond what is typically required (e.g., graduate courses, continuing education). We received responses from 23 programs; 14 of these programs reported having expanded diversity training primarily at the readiness for practice (n 15) level, followed by readiness for practicum (n 5) and readiness for graduate school (n 2) levels. Seven programs had diversity training that spanned more than 1 training level. We provided in-depth descriptions of exemplar diversity training at 5 programs spanning multiple training levels. Institutions aiming to integrate diversity programming into their training, with the goal of meeting recommended guidelines, can use this article as a practical guide. Future studies exploring the impact of integrated diversity training and impact on students at varying developmental levels are needed.

Competencies in Training at the Graduate Student Level: Example of a Pediatric Psychology Seminar Course.

The recently developed competencies in pediatric psychology from the Society of Pediatric Psychology (SPP) Task Force on Competencies and Best Training Practices in Pediatric Psychology provide a benchmark to evaluate training program practices and student progress toward training in level-specific competency goals. Graduate-level training presents a unique challenge for addressing the breadth of competencies required in pediatric psychology while maintaining development of broader clinical psychology training goals. We describe a recurring graduate-level pediatric psychology seminar course that addresses training in a number of the competency cluster areas. The structure of the seminar, examples of classroom topics that correspond with competency cluster areas as well as benchmarks used to evaluate each student's development in the competency area are provided. Specific challenges in developing and maintaining the seminar in this format are identified, and possible solutions are offered. This training format could serve as a model for established pediatric psychology programs to expand their didactic training goals or for programs without formal pediatric psychology training to address competencies outside of clinical placements.

A 2-year path to competency: A developmental framework for pediatric psychology training at the Yale Child Study Center.

A 2-year path to competency: A developmental framework for pediatric psychology training at the Yale Child Study Center.

Evidence-based interventions in pediatric psychology: progress over the decades.

This introduction to the special issue on Evidence-Based Interventions in Pediatric Psychology provides background on the process used to develop the special issue, a summary of the key findings from the series of reviews, and discussion of the implications for evidence-based practice. Authors followed a three-phase approach to develop their systematic reviews using rigorous systematic review methodology drawn heavily from the Cochrane Collaboration. The strength of the evidence for each pediatric psychology intervention was evaluated using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. The introduction discusses the progress that has been made in the evidence base for pediatric psychology interventions since the first special series published in 1999. Recommendations to stimulate further research and expand and strengthen the quality of the evidence base are described. The introduction concludes with implications from the special issue for pediatric psychology training in evidence-based practice.

Commentary: competencies in pediatric psychology: polishing pandora's box.

I applaud the Task Force on Competencies and Best Training Practice in Pediatric Psychology for painstakingly organizing and detailing core competencies to consider at different stages of training in pediatric psychology. Specifying training in pediatric psychology is a longstanding interest in the field (e.g., Drotar, 1975; Spirito et al., 2003; Tuma, 1980), and the current set of competencies is by far the most comprehensive to date. Detailing agreed-upon pediatric psychology training competencies has value to trainees, trainers, educators, regulators, policy makers, patients, and other stakeholders. Although I am enthusiastic about the classification of training objectives, there are a number of important considerations and challenges when embarking on this endeavor.

Recommendations for Training in Pediatric Psychology: Defining Core Competencies Across Training Levels

As a field, pediatric psychology has focused considerable efforts on the education and training of students and practitioners. Alongside a broader movement toward competency attainment in professional psychology and within the health professions, the Society of Pediatric Psychology commissioned a Task Force to establish core competencies in pediatric psychology and address the need for contemporary training recommendations. The Task Force adapted the framework proposed by the Competency Benchmarks Work Group on preparing psychologists for health service practice and defined competencies applicable across training levels ranging from initial practicum training to entry into the professional workforce in pediatric psychology. Competencies within 6 cluster areas, including science, professionalism, interpersonal, application, education, and systems, and 1 crosscutting cluster, crosscutting knowledge competencies in pediatric psychology, are presented in this report. Recommendations for the use of, and the further refinement of, these suggested competencies are discussed.

Editorial: Pioneers in Pediatric Psychology II

Beginning with this issue of the Journal of Pediatric Psychology (JPP), we are re-activating the Pioneers in Pediatric Psychology series. From 2000 to 2002, during Anne Kazak’s editorial term, four ‘‘pioneers’’ wrote articles for JPP where they reflected on their careers in pediatric psychology and their contributions to the conceptual development, research, and practice of our field (Drotar, 2001; Mesibov, 2002; Routh, 2000; Walker, 2000). Because these articles serve an important historical and archival function for the Society of Pediatric Psychology, it became clear that this would be a valuable series to reactivate. Thus, we asked Phyllis Magrab to submit an article for this series, and her contribution appears in this issue of the journal. As you read her observations of pediatric psychology from the early years of the Society and over time in the field, the importance of documenting the history and learning from such pioneering pediatric psychologists is emphasized. When we invite authors to prepare a manuscript for this series, we provide guidance via a list of potential concepts for them to consider. Specifically, we ask authors to use relevant life experiences to set the context for identifying needs or issues related to the field of pediatric psychology. We also ask them to discuss what the field was like at the time that they entered it and to reflect on how pediatric psychology has changed and what they believe to have caused such changes. One of our primary goals is for these articles to be useful to early career professionals and to those currently in training in pediatric psychology. Thus, we pose a series of training-relevant questions for ‘‘pioneers’’ to consider as they formulate their comments: What were the key milestones of your career and what decisions did you make along the way? What insights might you offer to early career professionals or those still in training as they consider what directions to pursue, settings to consider working in, or opportunities to take advantage of or avoid? How were you mentored and how did this influence how you mentor others? What lessons have you learned during your years in this field? How and in what contexts did you interact with others in the field and how did these interactions influence you? Also, discuss how interactions with those from other disciplines influenced you. What are the values you find central to your research/ practice in pediatric psychology? What are important issues that currently face our field? What are likely directions for the future? How do you hope the field will evolve over time? What needs to happen for this evolution to occur?

Training in Pediatric Psychology--Current Perspectives and Future Opportunities: Introduction to the Special Section

The most personally and professionally gratifying of my activities in the field of pediatric psychology has involved training of undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral fellows (Drotar, 2003). I continue to be impressed by the intellectual curiosity, values, and compassion, and raw talent that are demonstrated by the remarkable cadre of graduate and fellowship level trainees who are attracted to pediatric psychology. The future of our field will be theirs. To ensure their and our future, we need to be the best possible stewards of the extraordinary promise of these careers in the making by creating the most optimal training opportunities, experiences, and career paths for our future practitioners, teachers, and researchers. This special issue on training in pediatric psychology was conceived to address this continuing need. Training in pediatric psychology has evolved in important ways since the founding of our field (LaGreca, Stone, Drotar, & Maddux, 1988; Roberts et al., 1998; Spirito et al., 2003). The Society of Pediatric Psychology Task Force Report (2003): Recommendations for the Training of Pediatric Psychologists considered issues related to breadth and depth of training, scope of practice, training paths, primary care, interdisciplinary training, and mentors (Spirito et al., 2003). Topic areas identified as most important for obtaining knowledge and expertise in pediatric psychology included life span development, developmental psychology and developmental psychopathology, child, adolescent, and family assessment, intervention strategies, research methods and systems, evaluation, professional ethical and legal issues, diversity, roles of multiple disciplines in service delivery, prevention, family support, and health promotion, social issues affecting children, adolescents, and families, consultant and liaison roles, and disease process and medical management. This report was an important milestone in the development of training in our field as it expanded on the prior survey results and recommendations for pediatric psychology (LaGreca et al., 1988) and clinical child psychology. Since the Task Force report (Spirito et al., 2003), training programs that focus on pediatric psychology or offer pediatric training as part of another program at graduate, internship, and postdoctoral levels have expanded significantly. However, training programs in pediatric psychology face a number of significant challenges: Recruiting graduate students and facilitating development of their core competencies in both specialized training and an increasing breadth of content areas, training students to meet the challenges of research careers, and promoting the development of mentors in our field. The manuscripts in this special section respond to these challenges of pediatric psychology training.

Applying the Cube Model to Pediatric Psychology: Development of Research Competency Skills at the Doctoral Level

This article considers the development of research competencies in professional psychology and how that movement might be applied to training in pediatric psychology. The field of pediatric psychology has a short but rich history, and experts have identified critical competencies. However, pediatric psychology has not yet detailed a set of research-based competencies. This article initially reviews the competency initiative in professional psychology, including the cube model as it relates to research training. Next, we review and adapt the knowledge-based/foundational and applied/functional research competencies proposed by health psychology into a cube model for pediatric psychology. We focus especially on graduate-level training but allude to its application throughout professional development. We present the cube model as it is currently being applied to the development of a systematic research competency evaluation for graduate training at our medical/clinical psychology doctoral program at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. Based on the review and synthesis of the literature on research competency in professional psychology we propose future initiatives to develop these competencies for the field of pediatric psychology. The cube model can be successfully applied to the development of research training competencies in pediatric psychology. Future research should address the development, implementation, and assessment of the research competencies for training and career development of future pediatric psychologists.

A Brief Recollection of the Career of Joseph E. Zins

Joseph Zins received his doctorate in school psychology from the University of Cincinnati and completed post-doctoral training in pediatric psychology at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medi...

Training in pediatric psychology: a survey of predoctoral internship programs.

To describe internship training in pediatric psychology and to determine its correspondence with the recommendations of the Society of Pediatric Psychology (SPP) Task Force on Training. A survey based on the Task Force recommendations was sent to all internship programs that reported offering a major rotation in pediatrics. Opportunities in a wide range of assessment and intervention strategies were available. Training in disease process, medical management, and consultation/liaison with a variety of disciplines was also offered. Interns interacted with individuals from a range of developmental stages and ethnicities. Many professional issues were addressed. Experiences in research methods and prevention were less well represented. Despite some variability, experiences in a wide range of areas were offered by many programs in several of the training domains recommended by the SPP Task Force. However, there is room for improvement in training in research and prevention and health promotion.

Special Issue: Training in Pediatric Psychology.

Special Issue: Training in Pediatric Psychology.

Training experiences and theoretical orientations of pediatric psychologists.

To reexamine members of the Society of Pediatric Psychology (SPP) to document trends in training experiences of individuals who identify themselves as pediatric psychologists. Using the 1999 SPP membership list, we asked respondents to complete a survey describing their degree status, theoretical orientation of graduate program, type of internship/fellowship, current employment setting, and orientation to assessment and treatment of pediatric problems. The majority of the respondents matriculated from doctoral programs in the last two decades. Compared to a previous survey (Mullins, Harbeck-Weber, Olson, & Hartman, 1996), this survey had a higher percentage of respondents who completed accredited predoctoral or postdoctoral training in pediatric psychology. Over half of the respondents were primarily employed in medical centers or academic institutions; fewer respondents reported working in private practice settings than in the previous survey 10 years ago. Respondents' current orientation was most often described as cognitive-behavioral. In this survey, the percentage of respondents endorsing an eclectic orientation was lower; the percentage endorsing cognitive-behavioral, behavioral, and systems orientations increased. We discuss implications of these findings as they relate to training and practice in pediatric psychology.

Introduction to the Special Issue: Training in Pediatric Psychology

Introduction to the Special Issue: Training in Pediatric Psychology

Predoctoral training in pediatric psychology at the University of Kansas Clinical Child Psychology Program.

The training of clinical psychologists in general, and clinical child and pediatric psychologists in particular, has received significant commentary and evaluation in recent years (e.g., Cherry, Messenger, & Jacoby, 2000; Freedheim & Overholser, 1997; Kenny & Chmielewski, 1996; Roberts et al., 1998). Consistent with the biblical proverb of “iron sharpening iron,” the field of pediatric psychology, in particular, has benefited from the comments and critiques offered in the past. Perhaps owing to the earlier observations of a number of commentators, the recommendations for the training of pediatric psychologists offered by the Society of Pediatric Psychology (SPP) Task Force Report (Spirito et al., this issue) provide a thorough guide for program construction, program evaluation, and, possibly, program reinvention. A brief overview of several of the components of the Clinical Child Psychology Program (CCPP) at the University of Kansas (KU) presents an opportunity to examine how one program compares to the recommendations provided by the task force.

Pediatric psychology training and genetics: what will twenty-first-century pediatric psychologists need to know?

To demonstrate the importance of genetic knowledge in coming decades and to outline necessary areas of genetic education. This article reviews research involving genetic testing of children for cancer syndromes, development disabilities, psychiatric problems, and other conditions. The developmental, clinical, research, and consultation skills of well-trained pediatric psychologists will make them valuable collaborators with genetics professionals. Pediatric psychologists study the genetic etiology of psychiatric conditions and outcomes of genetic testing for physical disease. Pediatric psychologists will need training in the concepts and methods of the New Genetics. They should understand the implications of risk notification and genetic test disclosure and should be aware of related ethical concerns.