You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 10, Issue 2
  • Review: selective and indicated programmes are more effective than universal programmes for preventing depression in children and adolescents at 6 month follow-up

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Therapeutics
Review: selective and indicated programmes are more effective than universal programmes for preventing depression in children and adolescents at 6 month follow-up

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ebmh.10.2.52

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Horowitz JL, Garber J. The prevention of depressive symptoms in children and adolescents: a meta-analytic review. J Consult Clin Psychol 2006;74:401–15.OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science

    Q How effective are selective, indicated and universal depression prevention programmes for children and adolescents?

    METHODS

    Embedded ImageDesign:

    Systematic review with meta analysis.

    Embedded ImageData sources:

    PsycINFO (search date not stated), unpublished dissertations plus hand searches of reference lists and journals publishing relevant studies (from 1971 onwards).

    Embedded ImageStudy selection and analysis:

    Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions preventing depressive symptoms or disorders in children and adolescents <21 years, using generally accepted symptom measures (not defined). Data were extracted on intervention, number of participants, length of intervention and follow-up. Intervention programmes were classified as universal (delivered to all members of target population), selective (delivered to people above average risk of depression) or indicated (delivered to people with subclinical signs or symptoms of depression). Effect sizes (ES) were calculated using Cohen’s d. ES for self-report measures of symptoms were used being the only consistent method of assessment between studies. ES were …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • For correspondence: Jason L Horowitz or Judy Garber, Department of Psychology and Human Development, Peabody 512, Vanderbilt University, 230 Appleton Place, Nashville, TN 37203-5721, USA; jason.horowitz{at}vanderbilt.edu or judy.garber{at}vanderbilt.edu

    • Sources of funding: National Institute of Mental Health and William T Grant Foundation, USA.