SynthesisPloS one2024
A systematic review of non-clinician trauma-based interventions for school-age youth.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. 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.
- The World Health Organization's Early Adolescent Skills for Emotions: A Systematic Review on Current Evidence regarding Effectiveness and Implementation.Psychotherapy and psychosomatics · 2025Pooled it
- Adverse childhood and school experiences: a retrospective cross-sectional study examining their associations with health-related behaviours and mental health.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Exposure to adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) is recognised globally as a risk factor for health problems in later life. Awareness of ACEs and associated trauma is increasing within schools and educational settings, as well as the demand for supportive services to address needs. However, there is a lack of clear evidence for effective interventions which can be delivered by non-clinicians (e.g., the school staff themselves). Thus, we undertook a systematic review to answer the question: What evidence exists for the efficacy of non-clinician delivered trauma-based interventions for improving mental health in school-age youth (4-18 years) who have experienced ACEs? The protocol for the review is registered in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (ID: CRD42023417286). We conducted a search across five electronic databases for studies published between January 2013 and April 2023 that reported on interventions suitable for non-clinician delivery, were published in English in the last 10 years, and involved participants aged 4-18 years (school-age) that had exposure to ACEs. Of the 4097 studies identified through the search, 326 were retrieved for full text screening, and 25 were included in the final review. Data were extracted from included articles for analysis and selected studies were quality assessed using validated assessment tools. Data were analysed through narrative synthesis. There was considerable heterogeneity in study design, outcome measures, and the interventions being studied. Interventions included CBT, mindfulness and art-based programs. A key finding was that there is a lack of high-quality research evidence to inform non-clinician delivered trauma-informed interventions. Many included studies were weak quality due to convenience sampling of participants and potential bias. Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT)-based approaches are tentatively suggested as a suitable target for future rigorous evaluations of interventions addressing ACE-related trauma recovery and mental health improvement in school-age youth.
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.