Trial reportScientific reports2024
Exploring the efficacy of memory specificity training on depression among Iranian adolescents: a comparative analysis of online vs. in-person delivery.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Depression in adolescence is common worldwide, with the burden being highest in low- and middle-income countries. This study assessed the efficacy of in-person Memory Specificity Training (MeST) and computerized MeST (c-MeST) as cognitive training programs aimed at addressing depression among Iranian adolescents. A secondary aim was to evaluate the efficacy of MeST and c-MeST on autobiographical memory specificity, emotion regulation and cognitive control. Ninety Iranian male adolescents (aged 13-18 years) with depression were randomly assigned to three groups; MeST group (n = 30), c-MeST group (n = 30) and the non-active control group (n = 30). Participants completed the Beck Depression Inventory-II, Autobiographical Memory Test, Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test and Stroop Color and Word Test. The groups underwent either MeST and c-MeST. All the assessments were re-conducted after the intervention (post-intervention) and at 1-month post-intervention (follow-up). The in-person MeST group exhibited significantly higher autobiographical memory specificity at post-intervention and follow-up compared to the c-MeST group. Both groups demonstrated significantly lower levels of depression at post-intervention and follow-up. Both groups showed improvements in emotion regulation and cognitive control, which were found to mediate improvements in depression symptomatology. c-MeST and MeST appear promising brief interventions for the treatment of depression among adolescents in Iran.
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.