Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41286829›Full record

SynthesisBMC medicine2025

Approaches to early intervention for common mental health problems in young people: a systematic review.

Rebecca Appleton, Phoebe Barnett, Connor Clarke, Jialin Yang, Sadiya Begum, Julian Edbrooke-Childs, Isobel Emptage, Una Foye, Jessica L Griffiths, Isabel Hanson and 12 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

22 authors.

Rebecca Appleton *Division of Psychiatry, NIHR Policy Research Unit in Mental Health, University College London, London, UK. r.appleton@ucl.ac.uk.
Phoebe Barnett *Division of Psychiatry, NIHR Policy Research Unit in Mental Health, University College London, London, UK.
Connor ClarkeDepartment of Applied Clinical Research and Epidemiology, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
Jialin YangInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Sadiya BegumDivision of Psychiatry, NIHR Policy Research Unit in Mental Health, University College London, London, UK.
Julian Edbrooke-ChildsAnna Freud Centre, University College London, London, UK.
Isobel EmptageDepartment of Applied Clinical Research and Epidemiology, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
Una FoyeMental Health Nursing Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Jessica L GriffithsInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, NIHR Policy Research Unit in Mental Health, King's College London, London, UK.
Isabel HansonNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Nima Cas HuntDivision of Psychiatry, NIHR Policy Research Unit in Mental Health, University College London, London, UK.
Ruby JarvisDepartment of Applied Clinical Research and Epidemiology, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
Maeve McAuliffeDepartment of Applied Clinical Research and Epidemiology, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
Emma MaynardFlorence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing Midwifery & Palliative Care, King's College London, London, UK.
Lizzie MitchellDivision of Psychiatry, NIHR Policy Research Unit in Mental Health, University College London, London, UK.
Irina MostafaDivision of Psychiatry, NIHR Policy Research Unit in Mental Health, University College London, London, UK.
Tamara PemovskaCentre for Evidence and Implementation, London, UK.
Rob SaundersCORE Data Lab, Centre for Outcomes Research and Effectiveness, Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK.
Kylee TrevillionInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, NIHR Policy Research Unit in Mental Health, King's College London, London, UK.
Polly WaiteDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Brynmor Lloyd-EvansDivision of Psychiatry, NIHR Policy Research Unit in Mental Health, University College London, London, UK.
Sonia JohnsonDivision of Psychiatry, NIHR Policy Research Unit in Mental Health, University College London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEffective early support for children and young people is a high priority. Early intervention approaches for young people with psychosis or eating disorders have substantial supporting evidence, but well-established approaches to delivering a prompt, effective response to young people presenting with early symptoms of anxiety and depression are lacking.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review of outcomes of early interventions or approaches for young people (between 11 and 25 years) with initial symptoms of depression, anxiety and other common mental health difficulties. Five bibliographic (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science Core Collection) and two grey literature (HMIC and PsycExtra) databases were searched for papers relating to youth, early intervention and common mental health problems. We conducted a narrative synthesis of models and assessed quality using CASP checklists.

resultsWe included 38 studies (43 publications): of these, seven studies (in eight publications) were randomised controlled trials. RCTs were high quality but other studies tended to lack control groups and be of lower quality. Approaches broadly aimed to provide a more comprehensive and effective early response to symptom onset, with primary goals falling into one of (1) making care more comprehensive and joined up, (2) increasing speed or ease of access to support or (3) providing targeted support for specific needs in addition to anxiety and depression. Some evidence indicates that these approaches may facilitate access and reduce waiting times in the short-term, whilst decreasing burden on other mental health or emergency services. Significant improvements in mental health and wellbeing compared to controls were also reported across most studies with comparator groups, alongside high acceptability of the support offered.

conclusionsOverall, models of early intervention for depression and anxiety show promise in improving access, experience and outcomes of care for young people. However, high heterogeneity of interventions and outcomes measured limits certainty. More robust controlled studies are needed, alongside comprehensive details of support received by young people through the intervention, and evidence of what works for whom in which settings.

Indexed as

Early Medical InterventionMental DisordersAdolescentAdultAnxietyChildDepressionHumansYoung AdultAnxietyDepressionEarly interventionSystematic reviewYoung people

Identifiers

PMID41286829
PMCPMC12642248

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.