Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35095586›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in psychiatry2021

Theories of Change and Mediators of Psychotherapy Effectiveness in Adolescents With Externalising Behaviours: A Systematic Review.

José M Mestre, Svenja Taubner, Catarina Pinheiro Mota, Margarida Rangel Henriques, Andrea Saliba, Erkki Heinonen, Sara Ramos, Patricia Moreno-Peral, Jana Volkert, Asta Adler and 11 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

21 authors at 13 institutions in 12 countries.

José M MestreInstituto para el Desarrollo Social y Sostenible (INDESS), Universidad de Cádiz, Cadiz, Spain.
Svenja TaubnerInstitute for Psychosocial Prevention, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Catarina Pinheiro MotaDepartment of Education and Psychology, University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal.
Margarida Rangel HenriquesCenter for Psychology at University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Andrea SalibaDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Malta and Mental Health Services Malta, Valletta, Malta.
Erkki HeinonenNational Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland.
Sara RamosInstituto para el Desarrollo Social y Sostenible (INDESS), Universidad de Cádiz, Cadiz, Spain.
Patricia Moreno-PeralInstituto de Investigación Biomédica de Málaga, Maálaga, Spain.
Jana VolkertInstitute for Psychosocial Prevention, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Asta AdlerInstitute of Psychology, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Rasa BarkauskieneInstitute of Psychology, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Sonia Conejo-CerónInstituto de Investigación Biomédica de Málaga, Maálaga, Spain.
Dina Di GiacomoDepartment of Life, Health and Environmental Sciences, University of L'Aquila, L'Aquila, Italy.
Yianna IoannouDepartment of Social Sciences, University of Nicosia, Nicosia, Cyprus.
Filipa Mucha VieiraCenter for Psychology at University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Jan Ivar RøssbergInstitute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Célia M D SalesCenter for Psychology at University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Stefanie J SchmidtDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Tjasa Stepisnik PerdihSchool of Advanced Social Studies, Nova Gorica, Slovenia.
Randi UlbergInstitute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Sonja ProtićInstitute of Criminological and Sociological Research, Belgrade, Serbia.
Universidade do Porto · PTUniversity of Oslo · NOHeidelberg University · DEInstituto de Investigación Biomédica de Málaga · ESUniversidad de Cádiz · ESVilnius University · LTFaculty of Applied Social Studies in Nova Gorica · SIInstitute of Criminological & Sociological Research · RSUniversity of Bern · CHUniversity of L'Aquila · ITUniversity of Malta · MTUniversity of Nicosia · CYUniversity of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExternalising behaviours are becoming a remarkably prevalent problem during adolescence, often precipitating both externalising and internalising disorders in later adulthood. Psychological treatments aim to increase the social functioning of adolescents in order for them to live a more balanced life and prevent these negative trajectories. However, little is known of the intervening variables and mediators involved in these treatments' change mechanisms. We conducted a systematic review, exploring the available evidence on mediators of psychological treatments for externalising behaviours and symptoms amongst adolescents (10 to 19 years old).

methodsA systematic search was performed on Medline and PsycINFO databases, which identified studies from inception to February 23, 2020. Eligible studies included randomised controlled trials that enrolled adolescents with externalising symptoms and behaviours as, at least, one of the primary outcomes. A group of 20 reviewers from the COST-Action TREATme (CA16102) were divided into 10 pairs. Each pair independently screened studies for inclusion, extracted information from the included studies, and assessed the methodological quality of the included studies and the requirements for mediators, following Kazdin's criteria. Risk of bias of RCTs was assessed by the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Extracted data from the included studies were reported using a narrative synthesis.

resultsFollowing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (PRISMA), after removing duplicates, 3,660 articles were screened. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. In a second stage, 965 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. A total of 14 studies fulfilled all inclusion criteria. The majority were related to systemic psychological treatment approaches. Two types of mediators were identified as potentially being involved in the mechanisms of change for better social improvements of adolescents: to increase healthier parent-adolescent relationships and parental discipline. However, there were significant and non-significant results amongst the same mediators, which led to discussing the results tentatively.

conclusionsFamily variables were found to be the largest group of investigated mediators, followed by relational, behavioural, and emotional variables. No cognitive or treatment-specific mediators were identified. Both adequate behavioural control of adolescents' peer behaviour and a better positive balance in their relationships with their parents seemed to buffer the effects of externalising behaviours in adolescents. Several methodological limitations concerning mediation testing design, outcome measures, and mediator selection have been identified. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was not required. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021231835.

Indexed as

adolescencedistal and proximal factorsexternalising behavioursexternalising disorderspsychological-treatment effectivenesssystematic reviewtherapeutic mediation

Identifiers

PMID35095586
PMCPMC8795767
OpenAlexW4206298700

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.