↓ Skip to main content

Assessment of dynamic change in psychotherapy with adolescents

Overview of attention for article published in Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

1 blog
1 tweeter
1 Facebook page


6 Dimensions

Readers on

50 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Assessment of dynamic change in psychotherapy with adolescents
Published in
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13034-018-0246-z
Pubmed ID

Elisabeth Ness, Hanne-Sofie Johnsen Dahl, Peter Tallberg, Svein Amlo, Per Høglend, Agneta Thorén, Jens Egeland, Randi Ulberg


Diagnostic interviews and questionnaires are commonly used in the assessment of adolescents referred to child and adolescent mental health services. Many of these rating scales are constructed for adults and focus on symptoms related to diagnosis. Psychodynamic Functioning Scales (PFS) focus on relational aspects and how the patients handle affects and solve problems, rather than manifest symptoms. As these aspects are considered important for mental health, the PFS were developed to assess change in adults, consistent with the relational and intrapsychic concepts of dynamic psychotherapy. The scales describe internal predispositions and psychological resources that can be mobilized to achieve adaptive functioning and life satisfaction. PFS consist of six subscales; the relational subscales Family, Friends and Romantic/Sexual relationships and the dynamic subscales Tolerance for Affects, Insight and Problem-solving Capacity. PFS has been used for the first time as a measure of change in adolescent psychotherapy. This study examines the reliability of PFS when used to assess adolescents' level of relational functioning, affective tolerance, insight, and problem-solving capacities. Outpatient adolescents 16-18 years old with a major depressive disorder were included in the First Experimental Study of Transference work in Teenagers (FEST-IT). They were evaluated before and after time-limited psychodynamic psychotherapy with an audio-recorded semi-structured psychodynamic interview. Based on the audio-tapes, raters with different clinical background rated all the available interviews at pre-treatment (n = 66) and post-treatment (n = 30) using PFS. Interrater reliability, the reliability of change ratings and the discriminability from general symptoms were calculated in SPSS. The interrater reliability was on average good on the relational subscales and fair to good on the dynamic subscales. All pre-post changes were significant, and the analyses indicated discriminability from general symptoms. The interrater reliability on PFS (mean) and Global Assessment of Functioning were good to excellent. Based on the interrater reliability in our study, PFS could be recommended in psychotherapy with adolescents by experienced clinicians without extensive training. From the post-treatment evaluations available, the scales seem to capture statistically and clinically significant changes. However, the interrater reliability on dynamic subscales indicates that subscales of PFS might be considered revised or adjusted for adolescents.Trial registration First Experimental Study of Transference-Work-In Teenagers (2011/1424 FEST-IT). ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01531101.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 20%
Researcher 8 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Other 3 6%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 14 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 50%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 8%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 14 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 July 2018.
All research outputs
of 14,537,474 outputs
Outputs from Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health
of 474 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 275,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,537,474 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 474 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 275,002 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them