Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19968381›Full record

SynthesisJournal of consulting and clinical psychology2009

A meta-analytic review of the Penn Resiliency Program's effect on depressive symptoms.

Steven M Brunwasser, Jane E Gillham, Eric S Kim

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 93 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
93citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
18.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

93 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 418 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Effects of an adolescent depression prevention program on maternal criticisms and positive remarks.Journal of family psychology : JFP : journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43) · 2020
    Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Prevention of Depression in At-Risk Adolescents: Predictors and Moderators of Acute Effects.Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry · 2016
    Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

33 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Steven M BrunwasserDepartment of Psychology, University of Michigan, 530 Church Street, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, USA. stevemb@umich.edu
Jane E Gillham
Eric S Kim
University of Michigan · USSwarthmore College · US

Funding

PREVENTION OF DEPRESSION IN SCHOOL CHILDRENR01MH052270 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI SELIGMAN, MARTIN E · 1996 to 2006
$3.0M
NIMH NIH HHS MH52270NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH052270
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this review was to evaluate whether the Penn Resiliency Program (PRP), a group cognitive-behavioral intervention, is effective in targeting depressive symptoms in youths. We identified 17 controlled evaluations of PRP (N = 2,498) in which depressive symptoms had been measured via an online search of PsycINFO, Medline, ERIC, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses and by requesting data from PRP researchers. We combined effect sizes (ESs; Glass's d), using random effects models at postintervention and two follow-up assessments (6-8 and 12 months postintervention). PRP participants reported fewer depressive symptoms at postintervention and both follow-up assessments compared with youths receiving no intervention, with ESs ranging from 0.11 to 0.21. Subgroup analyses showed that PRP's effects were significant at 1 or more follow-up assessments among studies with both targeted and universal approaches, when group leaders were research team members and community providers, among participants with both low and elevated baseline symptoms, and among boys and girls. Limited data showed no evidence that PRP is superior to active control conditions. Preliminary analyses suggested that PRP's effects on depressive disorders may be smaller than those reported in a larger meta-analysis of depression prevention programs for older adolescents and adults. We found evidence that PRP significantly reduces depressive symptoms through at least 1-year postintervention. Future PRP research should examine whether PRP's effects on depressive symptoms lead to clinically meaningful benefits for its participants, whether the program is cost-effective, whether CB skills mediate program effects, and whether PRP is effective when delivered under real-world conditions.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyAdolescentChildConfidence IntervalsDepressionDepressive DisorderFemaleHumansMaleRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSocial BehaviorSocial EnvironmentTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID19968381
PMCPMC4667774
OpenAlexW1998952703

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.