ReviewGlobal mental health (Cambridge, England)2025
What was done for youths aged 15 to 24 around the world? A systematic review of worldwide mental health interventions.
Review in Global mental health (Cambridge, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Towards comprehensive mental health literacy: a systematic review of interventions for youth aged 15-24.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2026Review
- Research advances on the pathogenesis and clinical interventions of post-stroke depression.Frontiers in neurologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The global prevalence of mental health disorders among youths aged 15 to 24 is a significant public health concern. This systematic review aimed to explore global strategies for promoting mental well-being and addressing mental health challenges within this demographic, as defined by the World Health Organization. A comprehensive search of electronic scientific databases was conducted on November 1, 2023, yielding 43 studies with a total of 29,581 participants published between 2008 and 2023 that examined mental health interventions targeting youth. This review identified heterogeneity across multiple dimensions including modes and modalities of intervention delivery, conceptualisations of mental health, measurement tools and implementation settings. Digital/ technology-based interventions were prevalent in high-income countries, whereas physical interventions were more commonly employed across all income groups, especially where technological infrastructure was limited. Cognitive-behavioural therapy, psychoeducation and mindfulness-based interventions dominated the intervention modalities, likely due to their structured formats, scalability and broad applicability across a range of settings and mental health conditions. However, limited evidence of cultural adaptation in the reviewed interventions highlights the need for more inclusive and context-sensitive approaches. Schools were the most frequent delivery setting; however, reliance on educational platforms risks excluding out-of-school and marginalised youth. Conceptually, the reviewed interventions reflected both disorder-specific (diagnostic) and transdiagnostic understandings of mental health, affirming a spectrum-based view that integrates symptom reduction with well-being enhancement. This dual lens supports emerging frameworks such as the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP). Measurement heterogeneity mirrored conceptual diversity, with both standardised and context-specific tools used to assess outcomes. This diversity highlighted the urgent need for culturally relevant, flexible and multi-modal interventions that span diverse settings and conceptualisations to equitably support youth mental health worldwide.
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.