Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37059918›Full record

SynthesisClinical child and family psychology review2023

Effectiveness of Psychotherapy for Internalising Symptoms in Children and Adolescents When Delivered in Routine Settings: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Viviana M Wuthrich, Dino Zagic, Sophie J Dickson, Lauren F McLellan, Jessamine T-H Chen, Michael P Jones, Ronald M Rapee

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical child and family psychology review, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Viviana M WuthrichCentre for Emotional Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, 2109, Australia. viviana.wuthrich@mq.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0001-7227-229X
Dino ZagicCentre for Emotional Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, 2109, Australia.
Sophie J DicksonCentre for Emotional Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, 2109, Australia.
Lauren F McLellanCentre for Emotional Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, 2109, Australia.
Jessamine T-H ChenCentre for Emotional Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, 2109, Australia.
Michael P JonesCentre for Emotional Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, 2109, Australia.
Ronald M RapeeCentre for Emotional Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, 2109, Australia.
Macquarie University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the effectiveness of psychological interventions for internalising disorders in youth when delivered in routine settings. Secondary aims were to examine the effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy and determine moderators of treatment response. The study was pre-registered (PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020202776). Databases were systematically searched (PsycINFO, Medline, Embase, PubMed, ERIC) in December 2022 and screened according to the PRISMA 2020 statement. Inclusion: School aged participants (4-18 years) with a primary internalising disorder; psychotherapy delivered in a routine setting (e.g. outpatient clinic, school) by setting staff; compared psychotherapy to any control in a randomised controlled trial; reported pre-to-post or pre-to-follow-up comparisons on the primary disorder according to child, parent or independent evaluator report; and was published in English. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROB 2.0 Cochrane tool. Results were synthesised using random effects to pool estimates. Risk ratios were used to analyse dichotomous data and standardised mean differences (SMD) for continuous data. Forty-five studies were included (N = 4901 participants; M = 13 years; range 8-16; SD = 2.5). Nine used waitlist control, 17 treatment as usual, 4 placebo; 15 compared psychotherapy to active control. Psychotherapy was associated with small significant effects pre- to post-treatment compared to non-active controls for anxiety (SMD =  - 0.24 to 0.50) and depression (SMD =  - 0.19 to 0.34) with effects differing by informant. Psychotherapy led to small significant pre-to-post-benefits in youth internalising disorders in routine settings. Results are limited by reporter type and follow-up.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyPsychotherapyAdolescentAnxietyAnxiety DisordersChildHumansPsychosocial InterventionRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnxietyDepressionEffectivenessMeta-analysisSystematic reviewYouth

Identifiers

PMID37059918
PMCPMC10465434
OpenAlexW4365810758

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.