Trial reportEuropean child & adolescent psychiatry2021
Low intensity treatment for clinically anxious youth: a randomised controlled comparison against face-to-face intervention.
Trial report in European child & adolescent psychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of Psychotherapy for Children and Adolescents with Anxiety Disorders on Global and Domain-Specific Functioning: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Clinical child and family psychology review · 2022Pooled it
- A proof of concept study on digital interventions for reducing socio-evaluative stress and anxiety in youth.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Acceptability and Feasibility of Stepped-Care for Anxious Adolescents in Community Mental Health Services: A Secondary Analysis.Child psychiatry and human development · 2023Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Methods to deliver empirically validated treatments for anxious youth that require fewer therapist resources (low intensity) are beginning to emerge. However, the relative efficacy of low-intensity treatment for youth anxiety against standard face-to-face delivery has not been comprehensively evaluated. Young people aged 6-16 years with a primary anxiety disorder (N = 281) were randomly allocated to treatment delivered either face-to-face or in a low-intensity format. Face-to-face treatment comprised ten, 60-min sessions delivered by a qualified therapist. Low intensity comprised information delivered in either printed (to parents of children under 13) or electronic (to adolescents aged 13 +) format and was supported by up to four telephone sessions with a minimally qualified therapist. Youth receiving face-to-face treatment were significantly more likely to remit from all anxiety disorders (66%) than youth receiving low intensity (49%). This difference was reflected in parents' (but not child) reports of child's anxiety symptoms and life interference. No significant moderators were identified. Low intensity delivery utilised significantly less total therapist time (175 min) than face-to-face delivery (897 min) and this was reflected in a large mean difference in therapy costs ($A735). Standard, face-to-face treatment for anxious youth is associated with significantly better outcomes than delivery of similar content using low-intensity methods. However, the size of this difference was relatively small. In contrast, low-intensity delivery requires markedly less time from therapists and subsequently lower treatment cost. Data provide valuable information for youth anxiety services.Clinical trial registration information: A randomised controlled trial of standard care versus stepped care for children and adolescents with anxiety disorders; https://anzctr.org.au/ ; ACTRN12612000351819.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32632763What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.