Purpose/Objective: to describe the process of adapting the evidence-based Teen Online Problem Solving (TOPS) program, a telehealth problem-solving treatment addressing executive function and behavior regulation challenges in adolescents with traumatic brain injury, in Italy, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. Research Method/Design: We describe the process of adapting and translating the TOPS program in three case studies with unique methods and samples. In Italy, 14 parents of adolescents with TBI participated in focus groups and two adolescents with TBI and their parents and two physicians provided input on the resulting translation. In New Zealand, an independent Māori cultural advisor reviewed the content, and six adolescent-parent dyads and two health professionals completed the 10 modules independently over a five-week period to inform adaptation. In the United Kingdom, a team of neuropsychologists and a parent of an adolescent with ABI reviewed and adapted the content through successive iterations. Results: in Italy, suggested changes included greater emphasis on nonverbal communication and clearer examples of inappropriate problem-solving responses. In New Zealand, parents and adolescents rated the program as acceptable and helpful. Suggestions included incorporating familiar Māori settings, integrating religion, and developing videos with New Zealand adolescents. In the United Kingdom, iterative refinements focused on adapting TOPS for other acquired brain injuries and reflecting cross-national differences (e.g. drinking age). Conclusions/Implications: These three case studies suggest that programs such as TOPS developed in one cultural context can be broadly acceptable in other contexts, with adaptations focusing on tailoring to reflect the unique cultural and linguistic setting.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: to describe the process of adapting the evidence-based Teen Online Problem Solving (TOPS) program, a telehealth problem-solving treatment addressing executive function and behavior regulation challenges in adolescents with traumatic brain injury, in Italy, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. Research Method/Design: We describe the process of adapting and translating the TOPS program in 3 case studies with unique methods and samples. In Italy, 14 parents of adolescents with TBI participated in focus groups, and 2 adolescents with TBI and their parents and 2 physicians provided input on the resulting translation. In New Zealand, an independent Māori cultural advisor reviewed the content, and 6 adolescent-parent dyads and 2 health professionals completed the 10 modules independently over a five-week period to inform adaptation. In the United Kingdom, a team of neuropsychologists and a parent of an adolescent with ABI reviewed and adapted the content through successive iterations. RESULTS: in Italy, suggested changes included greater emphasis on nonverbal communication and clearer examples of inappropriate problem-solving responses. In New Zealand, parents and adolescents rated the program as acceptable and helpful. Suggestions included incorporating familiar Māori settings, integrating religion, and developing videos with New Zealand adolescents. In the United Kingdom, iterative refinements focused on adapting TOPS for other acquired brain injuries and reflecting cross-national differences (e.g. drinking age). CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: These 3 case studies suggest that programs such as TOPS developed in 1 cultural context can be broadly acceptable in other contexts, with adaptations focusing on tailoring to reflect the unique cultural and linguistic setting. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

There has been recent emphasis on the assessment of competence in psychotherapy training courses to improve evidence-based practice and outcomes for clients. The Systemic Practice Scale (SPS) was developed as a structured way of evaluating systemic practice. There is, however, little research on the impact and experience of competence measures, particularly in the context of systemic practice. Five focus groups conducted with sixteen students and seven supervisors from systemic family practice (SFP) programmes explored their views of the SPS as an appropriate measure of systemic competence. Data was analysed using a discourse analysis with three dominant discourses identified: feedback as valuable but uncomfortable; measuring competence; and being systemic. The SPS was viewed as a valuable and useful measure of systemic competence when reflexivity and collaboration is maintained between the student and supervisor. Practitioner points: There is limited research exploring the use of competence measures in systemic practice the SPS was perceived as broadening perspectives of students’ practice and competence, reiterating the importance of feedback in a collaborative supervisory relationship Increasingly the SPS is being used across clinical psychotherapy training courses (including systemic IAPT course and Doctorate of Clinical Psychology) it has the potential to be used more widely with wider implications for the development of systemic training standards in systemic practice.

The highest incidence rate of childhood brain tumours is in children below the age of five years, who are particularly vulnerable to the effects of treatments. The assessment of quality of survival (QoS) in multiple domains is essential to compare the outcomes for different tumour types and treatment regimens. The aim of this position statement is to present the domains of health and functioning to be assessed in children from birth to five years, to advance the collection of a common QoS data set in European brain tumour trials. The QoS group of the European Society of Paediatric Oncology (SIOP-E) Brain Tumour group conducted consensus discussions over a period of six years to establish domains of QoS that should be prioritised in clinical trials involving children under 5 years. The domains of health and functioning that were agreed to affect QoS included: medical outcomes (e.g. vision, hearing, mobility, endocrine), emotion, behaviour, adaptive behaviour, and cognitive functioning. As for children aged five years and older, a 'core plus' approach is suggested in which core assessments are recommended for all clinical trials. The core component for children from birth to three years includes indirect assessment which, in this age-group, requires proxy assessment by a parent, of cognitive, emotional and behaviour variables and both direct and indirect endocrine measures. For children from four years of age direct cognitive assessment is also recommended as 'core'. The 'plus' components enable the addition of assessments which can be selected by individual countries and/or by, age-, treatment-, tumour type- and tumour location-specific trials.

It is increasingly accepted that survival alone is an inadequate measure of the success of childhood brain tumour treatments. Consequently, there is growing emphasis on capturing quality of survival. Ependymomas are the third most frequently occurring brain tumours in childhood and present significant clinical challenges. European Society of Paediatric Oncology Ependymoma II is a comprehensive international program aiming to evaluate outcomes under different treatment regimens and improve diagnostic accuracy. Importantly, there has been agreement to lower the age at which children with posterior fossa ependymoma undergo focal irradiation from three years to either eighteen months or one year of age. Hitherto radiotherapy in Europe had been reserved for children over three years due to concerns over adverse cognitive outcomes following irradiation of the developing brain. There is therefore a duty of care to include longitudinal cognitive follow-up and this has been agreed as an essential trial outcome. Discussions between representatives of 18 participating European countries over 10 years have yielded European consensus for an internationally accepted test battery for follow-up of childhood ependymoma survivors. The 'Core-Plus' model incorporates a two-tier approach to assessment by specifying core tests to establish a minimum dataset where resources are limited, whilst maintaining scope for comprehensive assessment where feasible. The challenges leading to the development of the Core-Plus model are presented alongside learning from the initial stages of the trial. We propose that this model could provide a solution for future international trials addressing both childhood brain tumours and other conditions associated with cognitive morbidity.