ArticleThe British journal of clinical psychology2025
'School-based screen-and-treat': An effective blueprint for expediating access to care in children experiencing PTSD following disasters.
Article in The British journal of clinical psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychological Interventions for PTSD Children and Adolescents Within Two Years of Natural Disasters: A Systematic Scoping Review.Journal of child & adolescent trauma · 2026Article
- 'School-based screen-and-treat': An effective blueprint for expediating access to care in children experiencing PTSD following disasters.The British journal of clinical psychology · 2025Article
- Supporting Children's Mental Health Needs in Disasters.Pediatrics · 2025Review
- Exploring the genetic and socioeconomic interplay between ADHD and anxiety disorders using Mendelian randomization.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWhile 5%-10% of children exposed to natural disasters develop PTSD, few children access support. This paper reports on the proactive 'screen-and-treat' approach deployed following devastating floods in Queensland, Australia, in 2011 and presents results for children in the Lockyer Valley (the most impacted community).
designOpen treatment study (2011-2012) within a government-funded post-disaster service response.
methodsOne hundred and fifty children (7-12 years) completed pencil-and-paper screening (PTSD, anxiety and depression) at school. Eighty children endorsing either clinical levels of PTSD, or moderate levels of PTSD and clinical levels of either anxiety or depression, and their parents, completed a structured diagnostic interview. Forty-eight children were offered a free trauma-focused CBT intervention. The parents of 19 children accepted this offer. Most clinicians were clinical psychology trainees from local universities. All measures were repeated at post-treatment, 6- and 12-month follow-up. Note: The term 'parents' is used to refer to the wide variety of people serving as a child's primary caregiver.
resultsPre-treatment, all children met diagnostic criteria for full (N = 17) or sub-clinical PTSD. By post-treatment, 10.5% met criteria for PTSD, with 0% meeting criteria at the 12-month follow-up. The incidence of anxiety and depressive disorders also reduced significantly. There were no differences in outcomes for children seen by trainees compared to experienced clinicians.
conclusionsA school-based screen-and-treat approach offers potential as a means of identifying and treating children following natural disaster exposure. However, engagement of families at the outset, and when offering intervention was challenging. Postgraduate trainees represent an effective potential workforce in a post-disaster environment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.