Skip to main content

Table 5 SDQ scores for Foster Carer and Young Person reports at each time point

From: The Herts and Minds study: feasibility of a randomised controlled trial of Mentalization-Based Treatment versus usual care to support the wellbeing of children in foster care

  

UCC

MBT

Adjusted difference

Scale Score

Total

N

Mean (sd)

N

Mean (sd)

90% CI

d’ (90% CI)

Total SDQ score (foster-carer report)

Baseline

36

21

19.8 (6.9)

15

18.5 (7.1)

12 Weeks

35

21

18.9 (4.6)

14

19.1 (6.6)

−1.7 (−5.8, 2.4)

−0.31 (−0.7,0.1)

24 Weeks

35

21

17.1 (7.0)

14

19.0 (7.4)

−3.1 (−8.2, 1.9)

−0.44 (− 0.8,0.0)

Internalising sub-scale (foster carer report)

 Baseline

36

21

7.9 (4.5)

15

6.7 (4.3)

  

 12 Weeks

35

21

7.4 (3.3)

14

7.3 (4.1)

−1.3 (−3.9, 1.4)

−0.35 (−0.7, 0.0)

 24 Weeks

35

21

6.4 (4.2)

14

7.4 (4.6)

−2.1 (−4.9, 0.7)

−0.48 (− 0.8, − 0.1)

Externalising sub-scale (foster carer report)

 Baseline

36

21

11.9 (4.5)

15

11.8 (3.9)

  

 12 Weeks

35

21

11.5 (4.0)

14

11.9 (3.9)

−0.2 (− 2.5, 2.2)

− 0.04 (− 0.4, 0.3)

 24 Weeks

35

21

10.7 (4.2)

14

11.6 (4.0)

−0.8 (−3.5, 1.9)

− 0.20 (− 0.5, 0.2)

Total SDQ score (young person self-report)

  Baseline

18

9

12.2 (8.0)

9

14.2 (5.9)

  

  12 Weeks

20

11

13.0 (7.7)

9

12.8 (6.9)

4.9 (−1.0, 10.8)

0.67 (0.2, 1.1)

  24 Weeks

20

11

12.5 (6.2)

9

12.9 (4.8)

4.2 (−0.8, 9.3)

0.76 (0.3, 1.2)

Internalising sub-scale (young person self-report)

 Baseline

18

9

4.2 (4.5)

9

6.3 (3.9)

  

 12 Weeks

20

11

5.4 (4.5)

9

4.9 (4.1)

4.5 (0.8, 8.2)

1.04 (0.5, 1.5)

 24 Weeks

20

11

5.2 (3.4)

9

3.6 (2.7)

4.0 (0.4, 7.6)

1.30 (0.7, 1.7)

Externalising sub-scale (young person self-report)

 Baseline

18

9

8.0 (4.6)

9

7.9 (3.4)

  

 12 Weeks

20

11

7.7 (3.7)

9

7.9 (4.4)

0.6 (−2.0, 3.2)

0.15 (−0.3, 0.6)

 24 Weeks

20

11

7.4 (3.6)

9

9.3 (5.0)

0.4 (− 2.2, 3.0)

0.09 (− 0.3, 0.7)

  1. Note: The observed scores at each time point are reported with the standard deviation. Adjusted difference between groups was estimated using a hierarchical regression model, with adjustment for baseline SDQ and Foster Carer Reflective Function
  2. The figures in bold indicate effect sizes (d) where the confidence interval for d does not include zero, indicating confidence (95%) that the effect size is >0