ReviewLancet regional health. Americas2026
The fine line between the cure and the illness: the risks of prescriptive emotionality and sociality for youth mental health.
Review in Lancet regional health. Americas, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biopsychosocial risk pathways to school violence in youth: a scoping review of stress reactivity, mental health outcomes, and prevention.Frontiers in child and adolescent psychiatry · 2026Review
- Behavioral pathways and psychosocial determinants of adolescent mental health: positioning nutrition health literacy as a candidate upstream target.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Review
- Compassionate mind training as school-based social and emotional learning: extension to younger pupils and effects of programme dosage.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
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
School-based initiatives are increasingly promoted as solutions to the youth mental health crisis, with Social Emotional Learning (SEL) among the most widely adopted frameworks worldwide. While designed to foster healthy socio-emotional development, evidence for SEL's long-term mental health benefits remains mixed. Concerns are also growing that universal, non-targeted SEL programs may inadvertently pathologize normal developmental experiences, reinforce self-monitoring, or generate cultural mismatches that undermine resilience. In this personal view, we examine key challenges associated with universal (i.e., non-targeted and intended for all students regardless of baseline risk) school-based programs modeled on SEL. While acknowledging their potential to promote youth well-being, we argue that prescriptive approaches to emotions and sociality can foster confusion among families, resistance among youth, and unintended distress. We highlight risks stemming from conceptual ambiguities and variability in implementation. Rather than abandoning universal programs, we call for rigorous evaluation, cultural adaptation, and integration within broader ecosocial-strategies to foster authentic, context-sensitive resilience in 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.