Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Trauma in Schools
Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Trauma in Schools (CBITS) is a school-based intervention designed to help children who have experienced traumatic life events. CBITS uses cognitive-behavioral techniques to reduce symptoms related to trauma exposure, build skills for handling stress and anxiety, and build peer and caregiver support.
CBITS consists of group, individual, and caregiver education sessions and can include an optional teacher education session. Students take part in 10 group sessions where they participate in interactive discussions, games, and exercises and review activities completed in preparation for the session. Session 1 introduces participants to CBITS. Session 2 focuses on reactions to trauma and relaxation training. Sessions 3 and 4 use cognitive therapy techniques to help students combat negative thoughts. Sessions 5–7 use activities to help students process the traumatic event through imagination, drawing, writing, and sharing. Sessions 8 and 9 focus on problem-solving. Session 10 addresses how to prevent relapses in trauma symptoms and includes a graduation ceremony.
Individual sessions occur between group sessions 2 and 5 and involve processing the traumatic event. All students participate in at least one individual session but can participate in up to two additional individual sessions based on their reactions to the prior individual session, symptoms since then, and progress in the group.
The two caregiver education sessions discuss how children react to stress, the goals and principles of the program, and how to help children relax and feel less afraid or nervous. Finally, the optional teacher education session is designed to increase teacher support for and understanding of the CBITS program.
CBITS is rated as a promising practice because at least one study achieved a rating of moderate or high on study design and execution and demonstrated a favorable effect on a target outcome.
Date Research Evidence Last Reviewed: Sep 2022
Sources
The program or service description, target population, and program or service delivery and implementation information were informed by the following sources: the program or service manual, the program or service developer’s website, the California Evidence-Based Clearinghouse for Child Welfare, and the studies reviewed.
This information does not necessarily represent the views of the program or service developers. For more information on how this program or service was reviewed, visit the download the Handbook of Standards and Procedures, Version 1.0
Target Population
CBITS is used with students from 4th grade through 12th grade who have witnessed or experienced traumatic life events and have significant symptoms of PTSD or depression.
Dosage
CBITS includes ten 45-minute group sessions typically held once per week. Groups include six to eight students of similar ages. The program also includes one to three individual student sessions each lasting 30–45 minutes, two caregiver education sessions, and an optional teacher education session. CBITS is typically delivered over 10–12 weeks.
Location/Delivery Setting
Recommended Locations/Delivery Settings
CBITS is designed to be implemented in school settings.
Location/Delivery Settings Observed in the Research
- School
Education, Certifications and Training
CBITS is implemented by mental health professionals with specialized training in cognitive behavioral therapy and experience working with people who have experienced traumatic events. Training delivered by certified CBITS trainers is recommended. Live training options include a 12 hour in-person 2-day training or a virtual training, typically delivered in four 3-hour modules. A self-led online training is also available.
Program or Service Documentation
Book/Manual/Available documentation used for review
Jaycox, L. H., Langley, A. K., & Hoover, S. A. (2018). Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Trauma in Schools (2nd ed.). RAND Corporation.
Available languages
CBITS materials are available in English, Arabic, and Spanish.
Other supporting materials
For More Information
Website: https://traumaawareschools.org/index.php/learn-more-cbits/
Email: info@traumaawareschools.org
Note: The details on Dosage; Location; Education, Certifications, and Training; Other Supporting Materials; and For More Information sections above are provided to website users for informational purposes only. This information is not exhaustive and may be subject to change.
Results of Search and Review | Number of Studies Identified and Reviewed for Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Trauma in Schools |
---|---|
Identified in Search | 17 |
Eligible for Review | 3 |
Rated High | 1 |
Rated Moderate | 1 |
Rated Low | 1 |
Reviewed Only for Risk of Harm | 0 |
Outcome | Effect Size
and Implied Percentile Effect |
N of Studies (Findings) | N of Participants | Summary of Findings |
---|---|---|---|---|
Child well-being: Behavioral and emotional functioning |
0.15
5 |
2 (26) | 491 |
Favorable:
2 No Effect: 24 Unfavorable: 0 |
Child well-being: Educational achievement and attainment |
0.03
0 |
1 (8) | 293 |
Favorable:
0 No Effect: 8 Unfavorable: 0 |
Note: For the effect sizes and implied percentile effects reported in the table, a positive number favors the intervention group and a negative number favors the comparison group.
Outcome | Effect Size
and Implied Percentile Effect |
N of Studies (Findings) | N of Participants | Summary of Findings |
Months after treatment when outcome measured |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Child well-being: Behavioral and emotional functioning |
0.15
5 |
2 (26) | 491 |
Favorable:
2 No Effect: 24 Unfavorable: 0 |
- |
Study 13157 - CBITS vs. Waitlist Control (Kataoka, 2003) | |||||
Children's Depression Inventory |
0.38
*
14 |
- | 198 | - | 1 |
Child PTSD Symptom Scale |
0.42
*
16 |
- | 198 | - | 1 |
Study 13169 - CBITS vs. Treatment as Usual (Sumi, 2021) | |||||
Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children – Alternate Version: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder |
0.21
8 |
- | 293 | - | 0 |
Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children – Alternate Version: Anxiety |
0.13
5 |
- | 293 | - | 0 |
Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children – Alternate Version: Depression |
0.12
4 |
- | 293 | - | 0 |
Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children – Alternate Version: Disassociation |
0.10
3 |
- | 293 | - | 0 |
Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children – Alternate Version: Anger |
0.15
5 |
- | 293 | - | 0 |
Youth Self-Report: Internalizing Problems |
0.19
7 |
- | 293 | - | 0 |
Youth Self-Report: Externalizing Problems |
0.12
4 |
- | 293 | - | 0 |
Youth Self-Report: Total Problems |
0.13
5 |
- | 293 | - | 0 |
Teacher's Report Form: Internalizing Problems |
-0.09
-3 |
- | 293 | - | 0 |
Teacher's Report Form: Externalizing Problems |
-0.03
-1 |
- | 293 | - | 0 |
Teacher's Report Form: Total Problems |
-0.05
-1 |
- | 293 | - | 0 |
Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children – Alternate Version: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder |
-0.04
-1 |
- | 293 | - | 12 |
Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children – Alternate Version: Anxiety |
-0.06
-2 |
- | 293 | - | 12 |
Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children – Alternate Version: Depression |
0.07
2 |
- | 293 | - | 12 |
Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children – Alternate Version: Disassociation |
-0.09
-3 |
- | 293 | - | 12 |
Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children – Alternate Version: Anger |
0.08
3 |
- | 293 | - | 12 |
Youth Self-Report: Internalizing Problems |
-0.03
-1 |
- | 293 | - | 12 |
Youth Self-Report: Externalizing Problems |
-0.17
-6 |
- | 293 | - | 12 |
Youth Self-Report: Total Problems |
-0.09
-3 |
- | 293 | - | 12 |
Teacher's Report Form: Internalizing Problems |
0.02
0 |
- | 293 | - | 12 |
Teacher's Report Form: Externalizing Problems |
-0.13
-5 |
- | 293 | - | 12 |
Teacher's Report Form: Total Problems |
-0.10
-3 |
- | 293 | - | 12 |
Academic Engaged Time Observations |
0.16
6 |
- | 293 | - | 0 |
Academic Engaged Time Observations |
0.04
1 |
- | 293 | - | 12 |
Child well-being: Educational achievement and attainment |
0.03
0 |
1 (8) | 293 |
Favorable:
0 No Effect: 8 Unfavorable: 0 |
- |
Study 13169 - CBITS vs. Treatment as Usual (Sumi, 2021) | |||||
Woodcock-Johnson III: Letter-Word Identification |
-0.02
0 |
- | 293 | - | 0 |
Woodcock-Johnson III: Passage Comprehension |
0.13
5 |
- | 293 | - | 0 |
Woodcock-Johnson III: Calculation |
-0.05
-1 |
- | 293 | - | 0 |
Woodcock-Johnson III: Applied Problems |
0.04
1 |
- | 293 | - | 0 |
Woodcock-Johnson III: Letter-Word Identification |
0.10
3 |
- | 293 | - | 12 |
Woodcock-Johnson III: Passage Comprehension |
-0.12
-4 |
- | 293 | - | 12 |
Woodcock-Johnson III: Calculation |
0.05
1 |
- | 293 | - | 12 |
Woodcock-Johnson III: Applied Problems |
0.07
2 |
- | 293 | - | 12 |
*p <.05
Note: For the effect sizes and implied percentile effects reported in the table, a positive number favors the intervention group and a negative number favors the comparison group. Effect sizes and implied percentile effects were calculated by the Prevention Services Clearinghouse as described in the Handbook of Standards and Procedures, Section 5.10.4 and may not align with effect sizes reported in individual publications.
Only publications with eligible contrasts that met design and execution standards are included in the individual study findings table.
Full citations for the studies shown in the table are available in the "Studies Reviewed" section.
The participant characteristics display is an initial version. We encourage those interested in providing feedback to send suggestions to preventionservices@abtglobal.com.
The table below displays locations, the year, and participant demographics for studies that received moderate or high ratings on design and execution and that reported the information. Participant characteristics for studies with more than one intervention versus comparison group pair that received moderate or high ratings are shown separately in the table. Please note, the information presented here uses terminology directly from the study documents, when available. Studies that received moderate or high ratings on design and execution that did not include relevant participant demographic information would not be represented in this table.
For more information on how Clearinghouse reviewers record the information in the table, please see our Resource Guide on Study Participant Characteristics and Settings.
Characteristics of the Participants in the Studies with Moderate or High Ratings | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Study Location | Study Year | Age or Grade-level | Race, Ethnicity, Nationality | Gender | Populations of Interest* | Household Socioeconomic Status |
Study 13157 - CBITS vs. Waitlist Control | ||||||
Characteristics of the Children and Youth | ||||||
Los Angeles, CA, USA | 2000 | Average age: 11 years; 68% in middle school; 32% in elementary school |
57% Country of origin: Mexico 18% Country of origin: El Salvador 13% Country of origin: Other 11% Country of origin: Guatemala |
50% Female | 90% Children in the program had clinical levels of PTSD symptoms; 32% had comorbid PTSD and depressive symptoms in the clinical range; 10% had clinical levels of depression only. | -- |
Characteristics of the Adults, Parents, or Caregivers | ||||||
Los Angeles, CA, USA | 2000 | -- | -- | -- | -- | 64% Employed |
Study 13169 - CBITS vs. Treatment as Usual | ||||||
Characteristics of the Children and Youth | ||||||
Northern California, USA | -- | Sixth Grade: 100% |
39% Latinx 24% Asian 18% Declined/missing 12% White 8% Black |
50% Male 50% Female |
-- | -- |
“--” indicates information not reported in the study.
* The information about disabilities is based on initial coding. For more information on how the Clearinghouse recorded disability information for the initial release, please see our Resource Guide on Study Participant Characteristics and Settings. The Clearinghouse is currently seeking consultation from experts, including those with lived experience, and input from the public to enhance and improve the display.
Note: Citations for the documents associated with each 5-digit study number shown in the table can be found in the “Studies Reviewed” section below. Study settings and participant demographics are recorded for all studies that received moderate or high ratings on design and execution and that reported the information. Studies that did not report any information about setting or participant demographics are not displayed. For more information on how participant characteristics are recorded, please see our Resource Guide on Study Participant Characteristics and Settings.
Studies Rated High
Study 13169Sumi, W. C., Woodbridge, M. W., Wei, X., Thornton, S. P., & Roundfield, K. D. (2021). Measuring the impact of trauma-focused, cognitive behavioral group therapy with middle school students. School Mental Health: A Multidisciplinary Research and Practice Journal, 13(4), 680-694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-021-09452-8
This study was conducted in a usual care or practice setting (Handbook Section 6.2.2)Studies Rated Moderate
Study 13157Kataoka, S. H., Stein, B. D., Jaycox, L. H., Wong, M., Escudero, P., Tu, W., Zaragoza, C., & Fink, A. (2003). A school-based mental health program for traumatized Latino immigrant children. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 42(3), 311-318. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-200303000-00011
This study was conducted in a usual care or practice setting (Handbook Section 6.2.2)Studies Rated Low
Study 13168Stein, B. D., Jaycox, L. H., Kataoka, S. H., Wong, M., Tu, W., Elliott, M. N., & Fink, A. (2003). A mental health intervention for schoolchildren exposed to violence: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 290(5), 603-611. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.290.5.603
This study received a low rating because baseline equivalence of the intervention and comparison groups was necessary and not demonstrated.Studies Not Eligible for Review
Study 13150
Auslander, W., McGinnis, H., Tlapek, S., Smith, P., Foster, A., Edmond, T., & Dunn, J. (2017). Adaptation and implementation of a trauma-focused cognitive behavioral intervention for girls in child welfare. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 87(3), 206-215. https://doi.org/10.1037/ort0000233
This study is ineligible for review because it is not a study of the program or service under review (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.6).
Study 13151
Auslander, W., Edmond, T., Foster, A., Smith, P., McGinnis, H., Gerke, D., Tlapek, S., Threlfall, J., Voth Schrag, R., Dunn, J., & Jonson-Reid, M. (2020). Cognitive behavioral intervention for trauma in adolescent girls in child welfare: A randomized controlled trial. Children and Youth Services Review, 119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105602
This study is ineligible for review because it is not a study of the program or service under review (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.6).
Study 13152
Jaycox, L. H., Cohen, J. A., Mannarino, A. P., Walker, D. W., Langley, A. K., Gegenheimer, K. L., Scott, M., & Schonlau, M. (2010). Children's mental health care following Hurricane Katrina: A field trial of trauma‐focused psychotherapies. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 23(2), 223-231. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.20518
Cohen, J. A., Jaycox, L. H., Walker, D. W., Mannarino, A. P., Langley, A. K., & DuClos, J. L. (2009). Treating traumatized children after Hurricane Katrina: Project Fleur-de-lis. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 12(1), 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-009-0039-2
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).
Study 13153
Allison, A. C., & Ferreira, R. J. (2017). Implementing Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Trauma in Schools (CBITS) with Latino youth. Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal, 34(2), 181-189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-016-0486-9
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).
Study 13154
Goodkind, J. R., Lanoue, M. D., & Milford, J. (2010). Adaptation and implementation of Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Trauma in Schools with American Indian youth. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 39(6), 858-872. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2010.517166
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).
Study 13155
Howard, J., Domingues, J., Kirmayer, L., & Mintzer, A. (2016). Disseminating trauma-focused cognitive-behavioral intervention in New York City public schools. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 55(10S), S357-S357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2016.07.113
This study is ineligible for review because it is not a study of the program or service under review (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.6).
Study 13158
Kataoka, S., Jaycox, L. H., Wong, M., Nadeem, E., Langley, A., Tang, L., & Stein, B. D. (2011). Effects on school outcomes in low-income minority youth: Preliminary findings from a community-partnered study of a school-based trauma intervention. Ethnicity & Disease, 21(3 Suppl. 1), S1-71-7. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3287975/pdf/nihms-353079.pdf
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).
Study 13160
Jaycox, L. H., Langley, A. K., Dean, K. L., Stein, B. D., Wong, M., Sharma, P., Scott, M. M., Schonlau, M., & Kataoka, S. H. (2009). Making it easier for school staff to help traumatized students. RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9443-1.html
This study is ineligible for review because it is not a study of the program or service under review (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.6).
Study 13161
Mendelson, T., Tandon, S. D., O'Brennan, L., Leaf, P. J., & Ialongo, N. S. (2015). Moving prevention into schools: The impact of a trauma-informed school-based intervention. Journal of Adolescence, 43(1), 142-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2015.05.017
This study is ineligible for review because it is not a study of the program or service under review (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.6).
Study 13162
Morsette, A., Swaney, G., Stolle, D., Schuldberg, D., van den Pol, R., & Young, M. (2009). Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Trauma in Schools (CBITS): School-based treatment on a rural American Indian reservation. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 40(1), 169-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2008.07.006
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).
Study 13163
Morsette, A., van den Pol, R., Schuldberg, D., Swaney, G., & Stolle, D. (2012). Cognitive behavioral treatment for trauma symptoms in American Indian youth: Preliminary findings and issues in evidence-based practice and reservation culture. Advances in School Mental Health Promotion, 5(1), 51-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/1754730X.2012.664865
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).
Study 13164
Ngo, V., Langley, A., Kataoka, S. H., Nadeem, E., Escudero, P., & Stein, B. D. (2008). Providing evidence-based practice to ethnically diverse youths: Examples from the Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Trauma in Schools (CBITS) program. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 47(8), 858-862. https://doi.org/10.1097/CHI.0b013e3181799f19
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).
Study 13166
Santiago, C. D., Lennon, J. M., Fuller, A. K., Brewer, S. K., & Kataoka, S. H. (2014). Examining the impact of a family treatment component for CBITS: When and for whom is it helpful? Journal of Family Psychology, 28(4), 560-570. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037329
Santiago, C. D., Fuller, A. K., Lennon, J. M., & Kataoka, S. H. (2016). Parent perspectives from participating in a family component for CBITS: Acceptability of a culturally informed school-based program. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice and Policy, 8(3), 325-333. https://doi.org/10.1037/tra0000076
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).
Study 13167
Santiago, C. D., Kataoka, S. H., Hu-Cordova, M., Alvarado-Goldberg, K., Maher, L. M., & Escudero, P. (2015). Preliminary evaluation of a family treatment component to augment a school-based intervention serving low-income families. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 23(1), 28-39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1063426613503497
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).