Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23043090›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2012

Classroom based cognitive behavioural therapy in reducing symptoms of depression in high risk adolescents: pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial.

Paul Stallard, Kapil Sayal, Rhiannon Phillips, John A Taylor, Melissa Spears, Rob Anderson, Ricardo Araya, Glyn Lewis, Abigail Millings, Alan A Montgomery

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

55 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Paul StallardChild and Adolescent Mental Health Research Group, Department of Health, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK. p.stallard@bath.ac.uk
Kapil Sayal
Rhiannon Phillips
John A Taylor
Melissa Spears
Rob Anderson
Ricardo Araya
Glyn Lewis
Abigail Millings
Alan A Montgomery

Funding

Department of Health 06/37/04Medical Research Council G0800800
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the effectiveness of classroom based cognitive behavioural therapy with attention control and usual school provision for adolescents at high risk of depression.

designThree arm parallel cluster randomised controlled trial.

settingEight UK secondary schools.

participantsAdolescents (n=5030) aged 12-16 years in school year groups 8-11. Year groups were randomly assigned on a 1:1:1 ratio to cognitive behavioural therapy, attention control, or usual school provision. Allocation was balanced by school, year, number of students and classes, frequency of lessons, and timetabling. Participants were not blinded to treatment allocation.

interventionsCognitive behavioural therapy, attention control, and usual school provision provided in classes to all eligible participants.

main outcome measuresOutcomes were collected by self completed questionnaire administered by researchers. The primary outcome was symptoms of depression assessed at 12 months by the short mood and feelings questionnaire among those identified at baseline as being at high risk of depression. Secondary outcomes included negative thinking, self worth, and anxiety. Analyses were undertaken on an intention to treat basis and accounted for the clustered nature of the design.

results1064 (21.2%) adolescents were identified at high risk of depression: 392 in the classroom based cognitive behavioural therapy arm, 374 in the attention control arm, and 298 in the usual school provision arm. At 12 months adjusted mean scores on the short mood and feelings questionnaire did not differ for cognitive behavioural therapy versus attention control (-0.63, 95% confidence interval -1.85 to 0.58, P=0.41) or for cognitive behavioural therapy versus usual school provision (0.97, -0.20 to 2.15, P=0.12).

conclusionIn adolescents with depressive symptoms, outcomes were similar for attention control, usual school provision, and cognitive behavioural therapy. Classroom based cognitive behavioural therapy programmes may result in increased self awareness and reporting of depressive symptoms but should not be undertaken without further evaluation and research.

trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN19083628.

Indexed as

AttentionCognitive Behavioral TherapySchool Health ServicesAdolescentAdolescent PsychiatryChildCluster AnalysisDepressionDepressive DisorderDisease SusceptibilityFemaleHumansMaleOutcome Assessment, Health CareProgram EvaluationUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID23043090
PMCPMC3465253

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.