We need better ways to help students avoid the harms of stress: Results of a meta-analysis on the effectiveness of school-based stress management interventions

IF 3.8 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Ágnes Juhász , Nóra Sebestyén , Dorottya Árva , Veronika Barta , Katalin Pártos , Zoltán Vokó , Zsuzsa Rákosy
{"title":"We need better ways to help students avoid the harms of stress: Results of a meta-analysis on the effectiveness of school-based stress management interventions","authors":"Ágnes Juhász ,&nbsp;Nóra Sebestyén ,&nbsp;Dorottya Árva ,&nbsp;Veronika Barta ,&nbsp;Katalin Pártos ,&nbsp;Zoltán Vokó ,&nbsp;Zsuzsa Rákosy","doi":"10.1016/j.jsp.2024.101352","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The level of psychological stress in children and adolescents has increased rapidly over the past decade. The aim of the present meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of school-based intervention programs targeting stress management and coping/resilience in school-aged children. The present study used more rigorous selection criteria than previous meta-analyses by only including randomized controlled trials to increase the validity of the meta-analysis. Fifty-five studies were selected for the analysis, including 66 comparisons in the case of stress and 47 comparisons in the case of coping/resilience outcomes. A meta-regression with robust variance estimation was used. Effects were calculated as the standardized mean difference (Hedges' <em>g</em>) between the intervention and control conditions at posttest. The results highlighted important methodological issues and the influence of outliers. Without outliers, the results indicated a small significant overall effect on stress (<em>g</em> = −0.15, <em>p</em> &lt; .01) and coping/resilience (<em>g</em> = 0.14, <em>p</em> = .01). When outliers were included, the effect sizes markedly increased in both cases (<em>g</em><sub>stress</sub> = −0.26, <em>p</em> = .022; <em>g</em><sub>coping/resilience</sub> = 0.30, <em>p</em> = .009). Stress management interventions were more effective if they were delivered by mental health professionals or researchers than by teachers. Coping/resilience interventions were more effective in older age groups, in selective samples, and if they included cognitive behavioral therapy. An explanation of the results and a detailed discussion of the limitations of the study and its implications for practice are considered.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48232,"journal":{"name":"Journal of School Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022440524000724/pdfft?md5=7f38a21718fd2a25773b5d6d2a647c5e&pid=1-s2.0-S0022440524000724-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of School Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022440524000724","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The level of psychological stress in children and adolescents has increased rapidly over the past decade. The aim of the present meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of school-based intervention programs targeting stress management and coping/resilience in school-aged children. The present study used more rigorous selection criteria than previous meta-analyses by only including randomized controlled trials to increase the validity of the meta-analysis. Fifty-five studies were selected for the analysis, including 66 comparisons in the case of stress and 47 comparisons in the case of coping/resilience outcomes. A meta-regression with robust variance estimation was used. Effects were calculated as the standardized mean difference (Hedges' g) between the intervention and control conditions at posttest. The results highlighted important methodological issues and the influence of outliers. Without outliers, the results indicated a small significant overall effect on stress (g = −0.15, p < .01) and coping/resilience (g = 0.14, p = .01). When outliers were included, the effect sizes markedly increased in both cases (gstress = −0.26, p = .022; gcoping/resilience = 0.30, p = .009). Stress management interventions were more effective if they were delivered by mental health professionals or researchers than by teachers. Coping/resilience interventions were more effective in older age groups, in selective samples, and if they included cognitive behavioral therapy. An explanation of the results and a detailed discussion of the limitations of the study and its implications for practice are considered.

我们需要更好的方法来帮助学生避免压力带来的伤害:关于校本压力管理干预措施有效性的荟萃分析结果
在过去十年中,儿童和青少年的心理压力迅速增加。本荟萃分析旨在评估针对学龄儿童压力管理和应对/复原能力的校本干预计划的有效性。与以往的荟萃分析相比,本研究采用了更严格的筛选标准,只纳入随机对照试验,以提高荟萃分析的有效性。本研究选择了 55 项研究进行分析,其中 66 项比较了压力方面的结果,47 项比较了应对/复原力方面的结果。采用了稳健方差估计的元回归方法。效果以干预条件和对照条件之间在后测的标准化平均差(Hedges' )来计算。结果凸显了重要的方法问题和异常值的影响。在没有异常值的情况下,结果显示对压力(=-0.15,<.01)和应对/复原力(=0.14,=.01)的总体影响很小。如果将异常值包括在内,两种情况下的效应大小都会明显增加(=-0.26,=.022;=0.30,=.009)。由心理健康专业人员或研究人员进行压力管理干预比由教师进行干预更有效。应对/抗压干预措施在年龄较大的群体、选择性样本以及包含认知行为疗法的情况下更为有效。本文对研究结果进行了解释,并详细讨论了研究的局限性及其对实践的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of School Psychology
Journal of School Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
8.00%
发文量
71
期刊介绍: The Journal of School Psychology publishes original empirical articles and critical reviews of the literature on research and practices relevant to psychological and behavioral processes in school settings. JSP presents research on intervention mechanisms and approaches; schooling effects on the development of social, cognitive, mental-health, and achievement-related outcomes; assessment; and consultation. Submissions from a variety of disciplines are encouraged. All manuscripts are read by the Editor and one or more editorial consultants with the intent of providing appropriate and constructive written reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信