{"title":"A scoping review of school-based expressive writing implementation reporting practices: missed opportunities and new research directions.","authors":"Janet Amos, Justin Moase, Ingrid E Sladeczek","doi":"10.1007/s44192-025-00151-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Expressive writing (EW) interventions are an effective, flexible, and cost-efficient option for mental health promotion, making them ideally suited for resource-limited school settings. However, the effectiveness of EW interventions varies greatly across studies, which may be partly explained by how EW interventions are implemented. As school-based EW interventions become increasingly popular and more widely used, rigorous reporting of implementation can help advance this emerging field by informing how variation in implementation across studies influences intervention outcomes.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this scoping review was to evaluate the implementation reporting practices of EW interventions in school settings as they can profoundly impact EW effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The present scoping review assessed the current state of fidelity of implementation (implementation) reporting in the school-based EW literature and identified areas where more rigorous reporting is needed. Out of an initial sample of 367 studies, 19 were eligible for inclusion in the review. Data were analyzed for critical issues and themes derived from Cargo et al.'s (2015) Checklist for Implementation (Ch-IMP).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, the results of this scoping review indicate that researchers who implement EW in school settings have not consistently assessed key implementation domains such as dose received and fidelity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>To address this problem, the present review adds a unique contribution to the literature by identifying how rigorous reporting of implementation can strengthen the evidence base for school-based EW interventions. Specifically, researchers can support the use of EW interventions in schools through increased implementation reporting to better understand how variability in fidelity of implementation affects treatment outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":72827,"journal":{"name":"Discover mental health","volume":"5 1","pages":"27"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11880461/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discover mental health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s44192-025-00151-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Expressive writing (EW) interventions are an effective, flexible, and cost-efficient option for mental health promotion, making them ideally suited for resource-limited school settings. However, the effectiveness of EW interventions varies greatly across studies, which may be partly explained by how EW interventions are implemented. As school-based EW interventions become increasingly popular and more widely used, rigorous reporting of implementation can help advance this emerging field by informing how variation in implementation across studies influences intervention outcomes.
Purpose: The purpose of this scoping review was to evaluate the implementation reporting practices of EW interventions in school settings as they can profoundly impact EW effectiveness.
Methods: The present scoping review assessed the current state of fidelity of implementation (implementation) reporting in the school-based EW literature and identified areas where more rigorous reporting is needed. Out of an initial sample of 367 studies, 19 were eligible for inclusion in the review. Data were analyzed for critical issues and themes derived from Cargo et al.'s (2015) Checklist for Implementation (Ch-IMP).
Results: Overall, the results of this scoping review indicate that researchers who implement EW in school settings have not consistently assessed key implementation domains such as dose received and fidelity.
Conclusions: To address this problem, the present review adds a unique contribution to the literature by identifying how rigorous reporting of implementation can strengthen the evidence base for school-based EW interventions. Specifically, researchers can support the use of EW interventions in schools through increased implementation reporting to better understand how variability in fidelity of implementation affects treatment outcomes.