The sizeable body of evidence indicating that parenting programs have a positive impact on children and families highlights the potential public health benefits of their implementation on a large scale. Despite evidence and global attention, beyond the highly controlled delivery of parenting programs via randomized trials, little is known about program effectiveness or how to explain the poorer results commonly observed when implemented in community settings. Researchers, practitioners, and policymakers must work together to identify what is needed to spur adoption and sustainment of evidence-based parenting programs in real-world service systems and how to enhance program effectiveness when delivered via these systems. Collecting, analyzing, and using facilitator fidelity data is an important frontier through which researchers and practitioners can contribute. In this commentary, we outline the value of assessing facilitator fidelity and utilizing the data generated from these assessments; describe gaps in research, knowledge, and practice; and recommend directions for research and practice. In making recommendations, we describe a collaborative process to develop a preliminary guideline-the Fidelity of Implementation in Parenting Programs Guideline or FIPP-to use when reporting on facilitator fidelity. Readers are invited to complete an online survey to provide comments and feedback on the first draft of the guideline.
UNASSIGNED: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43477-023-00092-5.

Objectives: The prevalence of \"dental anxiety\" (DA) is often underestimated and numerous diagnostic methods are available for dental practitioners. It is difficult to differentiate between a dental phobia requiring an interdisciplinary approach and DA, which can be managed by dental practitioners alone. The appropriate use of diagnostic tools is key for the successful management of highly anxious and/or phobic patients. The aim was to provide a guideline to recognize dental fear and to differentiate DA from patients who are highly anxious or even have a phobia. Data sources: In total, 8,929 articles that were selected for the development of the German guidelines for \"Dental anxiety in adults\" in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and MedPilot were filtered for diagnosis of DA disorder. The focus for this review was on the use of scales to measure DA levels. The methods and tools used in the 51 reviewed articles to assess DA levels were evaluated in terms of their practicability and suitability in daily practice to differentiate between phobia (ie, DA disorder) and nonpathologic anxiety. In addition, the internal consistency (Cronbach alpha) of the questionnaires/tools was determined. Conclusion: All identified DA questionnaires validated in the German language had an acceptable to excellent internal consistency (0.7 to 0.986). The only validated questionnaire-free method was galvanic skin reaction measurement. For the assessment of DA and diagnosis of a DA disorder in adults, the survey by means of any suitable questionnaire or even several questionnaires in combination with a behavioral observation of the patient is currently the method of choice.