tions, diagnostic status may not be as important as other
clearly defined target symptoms and problems. Conveying
more information in reports about exclusion as well as
inclusion criteria, the qualification and training of assessors
and those who provide the interventions, inter-rater reliability
when more than one rater is used, rater drift, power
analyses, and assignment to treatment (e.g., random
assignment) are easily attainable goals. Addressing treatment
adherence concerns in child disaster interventions also
simultaneously benefits both science and practice. As in all
intervention studies, the ultimate cost–benefit of what
standards are feasible will depend on the particular cultural
and community disaster recovery needs with the active
involvement of community stakeholders in decision making.
Researchers should consider communicating explicit discussion
of these decisions in future reports to facilitate future
research endeavors in this area, including measuring
stakeholders' responses to such research participation [55].
Acknowledgment of support
This work was funded in part by the Substance Abuse
and Mental Health Services Administration (1 U79
SM57278) which established the Terrorism and Disaster
Center (TDC) at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences
Center. TDC is a partner in the National Child Traumatic
Stress Network (NCTSN).