Zhikai Qin, Jiajun Lan, Haoran He, Jun Yin, Junsheng Wang
{"title":"Dose-Response Meta-analysis of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Parental Stress in Parents of Children with Special Needs.","authors":"Zhikai Qin, Jiajun Lan, Haoran He, Jun Yin, Junsheng Wang","doi":"10.1007/s10567-025-00552-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To assess how cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) influences stress levels in parents of children with special needs, while also exploring the relationship between therapy intensity and possible influencing factors. We followed PRISMA guidelines and searched PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library through June 15, 2025, for randomized controlled trials. We defined PICOS explicitly as Population (parents of children with special needs), Intervention (CBT), Comparator (any control condition), Outcomes (parental stress measured by validated scales), and Study design (randomized controlled trials). Continuous outcomes were pooled as standardized mean differences (SMDs; differences in parental stress scores between the intervention and control groups). A three-level random-effects meta-analytic model was fitted to account for dependent effect sizes; heterogeneity was assessed with I<sup>2</sup> and the Q test. Sensitivity analyses and publication-bias assessments were performed. Subgroup and dose-response analyses were conducted to explore moderators. Sixteen trials met inclusion criteria; after exclusion of two outliers, 14 trials (n = 1007) were included in the primary analysis. There was substantial heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup> = 92.3%). Pooled results indicated that CBT significantly reduced parental stress (SMD = - 0.57; 95% CI - 1.00 to - 0.14; p = 0.0095). Interventions with moderate session duration (≈ 90 min) delivered once weekly over several weeks (total ≈ 11-12 weeks) were associated with larger pooled effects in our subgroup analyses. Larger effect estimates were also observed when stress was measured with the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS), when control groups received no active intervention, and among parents of children with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs). Trials with predominantly mothers (> 90%) showed significant pooled effects within that subgroup. Dose-response analyses suggested diminishing returns when session frequency exceeded twice weekly; a total intervention time of approximately 14.42-17.42 h was associated with the most significant average reductions in stress. CBT was associated with a moderate pooled reduction in parental stress across included trials. The intervention protocol most strongly associated with larger average effects in our dataset was \"≈ 90 min per session × once weekly × 11-12 weeks\"; however, this should not be interpreted as a universally optimal protocol given the high between-study heterogeneity and uncertainty in some subgroup estimates. Future RCTs with larger samples, more consistent outcome measurement, prespecified dose-finding designs, and long-term follow-up are warranted to refine CBT dosage thresholds and to validate generalizability across different cultures and disability types.</p>","PeriodicalId":51399,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review","volume":" ","pages":"90-104"},"PeriodicalIF":7.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-025-00552-4","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/12/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
To assess how cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) influences stress levels in parents of children with special needs, while also exploring the relationship between therapy intensity and possible influencing factors. We followed PRISMA guidelines and searched PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library through June 15, 2025, for randomized controlled trials. We defined PICOS explicitly as Population (parents of children with special needs), Intervention (CBT), Comparator (any control condition), Outcomes (parental stress measured by validated scales), and Study design (randomized controlled trials). Continuous outcomes were pooled as standardized mean differences (SMDs; differences in parental stress scores between the intervention and control groups). A three-level random-effects meta-analytic model was fitted to account for dependent effect sizes; heterogeneity was assessed with I2 and the Q test. Sensitivity analyses and publication-bias assessments were performed. Subgroup and dose-response analyses were conducted to explore moderators. Sixteen trials met inclusion criteria; after exclusion of two outliers, 14 trials (n = 1007) were included in the primary analysis. There was substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 92.3%). Pooled results indicated that CBT significantly reduced parental stress (SMD = - 0.57; 95% CI - 1.00 to - 0.14; p = 0.0095). Interventions with moderate session duration (≈ 90 min) delivered once weekly over several weeks (total ≈ 11-12 weeks) were associated with larger pooled effects in our subgroup analyses. Larger effect estimates were also observed when stress was measured with the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS), when control groups received no active intervention, and among parents of children with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs). Trials with predominantly mothers (> 90%) showed significant pooled effects within that subgroup. Dose-response analyses suggested diminishing returns when session frequency exceeded twice weekly; a total intervention time of approximately 14.42-17.42 h was associated with the most significant average reductions in stress. CBT was associated with a moderate pooled reduction in parental stress across included trials. The intervention protocol most strongly associated with larger average effects in our dataset was "≈ 90 min per session × once weekly × 11-12 weeks"; however, this should not be interpreted as a universally optimal protocol given the high between-study heterogeneity and uncertainty in some subgroup estimates. Future RCTs with larger samples, more consistent outcome measurement, prespecified dose-finding designs, and long-term follow-up are warranted to refine CBT dosage thresholds and to validate generalizability across different cultures and disability types.
期刊介绍:
Editors-in-Chief: Dr. Ronald J. Prinz, University of South Carolina and Dr. Thomas H. Ollendick, Virginia Polytechnic Institute Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal that provides an international, interdisciplinary forum in which important and new developments in this field are identified and in-depth reviews on current thought and practices are published. The Journal publishes original research reviews, conceptual and theoretical papers, and related work in the broad area of the behavioral sciences that pertains to infants, children, adolescents, and families. Contributions originate from a wide array of disciplines including, but not limited to, psychology (e.g., clinical, community, developmental, family, school), medicine (e.g., family practice, pediatrics, psychiatry), public health, social work, and education. Topical content includes science and application and covers facets of etiology, assessment, description, treatment and intervention, prevention, methodology, and public policy. Submissions are by invitation only and undergo peer review. The Editors, in consultation with the Editorial Board, invite highly qualified experts to contribute original papers on topics of timely interest and significance.