Evidence for Targeted and Universal Secondary School-Based Programs for Anxiety and Depression: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

IF 4.7 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL
Isabel Zbukvic, Samuel McKay, Samantha Cooke, Rebekah Anderson, Vita Pilkington, Lauren McGillivray, Alan Bailey, Rosemary Purcell, Michelle Tye
{"title":"Evidence for Targeted and Universal Secondary School-Based Programs for Anxiety and Depression: An Overview of Systematic Reviews","authors":"Isabel Zbukvic,&nbsp;Samuel McKay,&nbsp;Samantha Cooke,&nbsp;Rebekah Anderson,&nbsp;Vita Pilkington,&nbsp;Lauren McGillivray,&nbsp;Alan Bailey,&nbsp;Rosemary Purcell,&nbsp;Michelle Tye","doi":"10.1007/s40894-023-00211-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>While there are a number of systematic reviews on school-based mental health programs, there appears to be heterogeneity in their overall findings and conclusions, possibly due to the tendency to combine evidence from primary school and high school programs. To investigate the evidence for the effectiveness of targeted (for specific groups) and universal (for all students) mental health programs delivered in secondary schools, a systematic review of systematic reviews was conducted. A systematic search for reviews published from 2015 included outcomes for depression and anxiety—the most common mental health conditions—and quality appraisal of original studies in majority secondary school settings. A total of 395 references were screened and 14 systematic reviews were included. Of reviews that were assessed in full, most were excluded for not clearly separating studies in secondary school settings from primary school settings. Findings were generally positive but heterogenous in terms of quality and long-term outcomes. Interventions were mainly based on cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), with results showing that targeted interventions are generally effective in the short-term for both anxiety and depression, while universal programs may be effective in some situations, typically in the short term and when programs were CBT-based; where reviews focused on universal resilience programs there were no significant effects. The overview shows a need for systematic reviews focused on secondary school settings, which consider contextual and individual factors that can influence the implementation and effectiveness of programs.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45912,"journal":{"name":"Adolescent Research Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s40894-023-00211-1.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Adolescent Research Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40894-023-00211-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While there are a number of systematic reviews on school-based mental health programs, there appears to be heterogeneity in their overall findings and conclusions, possibly due to the tendency to combine evidence from primary school and high school programs. To investigate the evidence for the effectiveness of targeted (for specific groups) and universal (for all students) mental health programs delivered in secondary schools, a systematic review of systematic reviews was conducted. A systematic search for reviews published from 2015 included outcomes for depression and anxiety—the most common mental health conditions—and quality appraisal of original studies in majority secondary school settings. A total of 395 references were screened and 14 systematic reviews were included. Of reviews that were assessed in full, most were excluded for not clearly separating studies in secondary school settings from primary school settings. Findings were generally positive but heterogenous in terms of quality and long-term outcomes. Interventions were mainly based on cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), with results showing that targeted interventions are generally effective in the short-term for both anxiety and depression, while universal programs may be effective in some situations, typically in the short term and when programs were CBT-based; where reviews focused on universal resilience programs there were no significant effects. The overview shows a need for systematic reviews focused on secondary school settings, which consider contextual and individual factors that can influence the implementation and effectiveness of programs.

针对焦虑症和抑郁症的针对性和普及性中学校本计划的证据:系统回顾综述
虽然有许多关于校本心理健康项目的系统性综述,但其总体发现和结论似乎并不一致,这可能是由于倾向于将小学和中学项目的证据结合起来。为了调查在中学开展的有针对性(针对特定群体)和普遍性(针对所有学生)心理健康项目的有效性,我们对系统性综述进行了系统性检索。对 2015 年以来发表的综述进行了系统性检索,包括抑郁症和焦虑症(最常见的心理健康问题)的结果,以及对大多数中学环境中的原创研究进行的质量评估。共筛选出 395 篇参考文献,其中包括 14 篇系统性综述。在接受全面评估的综述中,大部分因未明确区分中学与小学环境下的研究而被排除在外。研究结果总体上是积极的,但在质量和长期结果方面存在差异。干预措施主要以认知行为疗法(CBT)为基础,结果表明,有针对性的干预措施对焦虑和抑郁在短期内通常有效,而普遍性计划在某些情况下可能有效,通常是在短期内,而且是在以 CBT 为基础的计划中;在以普遍性抗逆计划为重点的综述中,没有发现显著的效果。综述表明,有必要进行以中学环境为重点的系统性综述,这些综述应考虑到可能影响项目实施和有效性的环境因素和个人因素。
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
Adolescent Research Review
Adolescent Research Review PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL-
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Adolescent Research Review publishes articles that review important contributions to the understanding of adolescence.  The Review draws from the many subdisciplines of developmental science, psychological science, education, criminology, public health, medicine, social work, and other allied disciplines that address the subject of youth and adolescence. The editors are especially interested in articles that bridge gaps between disciplines or that focus on topics that transcend traditional disciplinary boundaries.  Reviews must be cutting edge and comprehensive in the way they advance science, practice or policy relating to adolescents.
×
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