Assessment and treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder in children.
No single OCD tool or treatment wins—combine methods and keep measuring.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Gerhardt et al. (1991) read every paper they could find on kids with OCD. They wrote a story-style review to see which tests and treatments work best. No lab work here—just a map of the 1991 evidence for clinicians.
What they found
Every paper claimed success, but no single tool or therapy beat the rest. The authors warn: pick more than one test and mix treatments carefully.
How this fits with other research
Hansen et al. (1989) had already shown one boy got better with exposure alone, a bright spot the 1991 review folds in. Guertin et al. (2019) later stretched that same exposure idea to a four-year-old with intellectual disability and still saw gains, proving the trick works even younger and with added delays. Stack et al. (2019) looked at kids who have BOTH autism and OCD; they found CBT plus visuals and parent help works—another vote for combo plans, not one-size-fits-all. These newer studies don’t kill the 1991 message; they simply give you clearer recipes for the mix-and-match approach it called for.
Why it matters
You still don’t have a magic bullet for childhood OCD. Start with a broad toolbox: use at least two assessment methods and pair exposure with other pieces like parent coaching or visuals when needed. The 1991 warning to stay flexible remains your safest guide.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add a second brief assessment (e.g., parent log) next to your main OCD checklist before you pick an intervention.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Childhood obsessive-compulsive disorder was believed to be very rare and, until quite recently, little effort was directed toward assessment or treatment. Today, typical assessment procedures include clinical and structured interviews, self-report and therapist or staff completed inventories, self-monitoring, and direct observation. No single method has demonstrated superiority, and each has had limitations. Multiple measures are therefore recommended. The treatment literature is composed largely of uncontrolled case studies presenting combinations of three or more treatments. Although all treatment-outcome reports illustrate positive effects, no one method has been superior treating either a single facet of the disorder or the disorder in its entirety.
Behavior modification, 1991 · doi:10.1177/01454455910153006