Mental Health Services and Policy Research, Columbia University, 1051 Riverside Dr., Unit 78, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev. 2010 Mar;13(1):1-45. doi: 10.1007/s10567-009-0060-5.
A comprehensive review of structured family support programs in children's mental health was conducted in collaboration with leadership from key national family organizations. The goals were to identify typologies of family support services for which evaluation data existed and identify research gaps. Over 200 programs were examined; 50 met criteria for inclusion. Programs were categorized by whether they were delivered by peer family members, clinicians, or teams. Five salient components of family support were identified: (a) informational, (b) instructional, (c) emotional, (d) instrumental, and (e) advocacy. Clinician-led programs were heavily represented (n = 33, 66%), followed by family-led (n = 11, 22%), and team-delivered (n = 6, 12%) programs. Key differences between programs delivered by clinicians or by peer family members were found in the degree of emphasis, research methodology, and outcomes. However, the content of the components was similar across all three program types. There are both important differences in emphasis across typologies of family support provided by clinicians, family members, or teams as well as important similarities in content. Family-delivered support may be an important adjunct to existing services for parents, although the research base remains thin. A research agenda to promote more rigorous evaluations of these services especially those delivered by peer family members is critical.
与主要的国家家庭组织的领导层合作，对儿童心理健康的结构化家庭支持计划进行了全面审查。目标是确定存在评估数据的各种类型的家庭支持服务，并确定研究空白。研究了 200 多个计划；其中 50 个符合纳入标准。根据计划是由同伴家庭成员、临床医生还是团队提供，对计划进行了分类。确定了家庭支持的五个突出组成部分：（a）信息，（b）指导，（c）情感，（d）工具和（e）倡导。以临床医生为主导的计划（n = 33，占 66%）占很大比例，其次是家庭主导的计划（n = 11，占 22%）和团队提供的计划（n = 6，占 12%）。在临床医生或同伴家庭成员提供的计划之间发现了程序的重点，研究方法和结果存在重要差异。但是，这三种计划类型的组成部分的内容相似。临床医生，家庭成员或团队提供的家庭支持的类型在重点上存在重要差异，并且在内容上也存在重要的相似性。家庭提供的支持可能是现有服务对父母的重要补充，尽管研究基础仍然薄弱。制定一项研究议程，以促进对这些服务的更严格评估，特别是对同伴家庭成员提供的服务的评估至关重要。
