scholarly journals Mediators and theories of change in psychotherapy for young people with personality disorders: a systematic review protocol

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jana Volkert ◽  
Svenja Taubner ◽  
Rasa Barkauskiene ◽  
Jose M. Mestre ◽  
Celia M.D. Sales ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Young People ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Psychosocial Functioning ◽  
Psychological Treatment ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Psychological Treatments ◽  
Theories Of Change ◽  
Prospective Longitudinal

Background: Personality disorders (PDs) are a severe health issue already prevalent among adolescents and young adults. Early detection and intervention offer the opportunity to reduce disease burden and chronicity of symptoms and to enhance long-term functional outcomes. While psychological treatments for personality disorders have been shown to be effective for young people, the mediators and specific change mechanisms of treatment are still unclear. Aim: As part of the “European Network of Individualized Psychotherapy Treatment of Young People with Mental Disorders” (TREATme), funded by the European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST), we will conduct a systematic review to summarize the existing knowledge on mediators of treatment outcome and theories of change in psychotherapy for young people with personality disorders. In particular, we will evaluate whether mediators appear to be common or specific to particular age groups, treatment models, or outcome domains (e.g., psychosocial functioning, life quality, adverse treatment effects). Method: We will follow the reporting guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement recommendations. Electronic databases (PubMed, PsycINFO) have been systematically searched for prospective, longitudinal, and case–control designs of psychological treatment studies which examine mediators published in English. Participants will be young people between 10 and 30 years of age who suffer from subclinical personality symptoms or have a personality disorder diagnosis and receive an intervention that aims at preventing, ameliorating and/or treating psychological problems. Results: The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and at conference presentations and will be shared with relevant stakeholder groups. The data set will be made available to other research groups following recommendations of the open science initiative. Databases with the systematic search will be made openly available following open science initiatives. The review has been registered in PROSPERO (evaluation is pending, registration number ID 248959).Implications: This review will deliver a comprehensive overview on the empirical basis to contribute to the further development of psychological treatments for young people with personality disorders.

scholarly journals Mediators and Theories of Change in Psychotherapy for Young People With Personality Disorders: A Systematic Review Protocol

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jana Volkert ◽  
Svenja Taubner ◽  
Rasa Barkauskiene ◽  
Jose M. Mestre ◽  
Célia M. D. Sales ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Young People ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Psychosocial Functioning ◽  
Psychological Treatment ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Psychological Treatments ◽  
Theories Of Change ◽  
Prospective Longitudinal

Background: Personality disorders (PDs) are a severe health issue already prevalent among adolescents and young adults. Early detection and intervention offer the opportunity to reduce disease burden and chronicity of symptoms and to enhance long-term functional outcomes. While psychological treatments for PDs have been shown to be effective for young people, the mediators and specific change mechanisms of treatment are still unclear.Aim: As part of the “European Network of Individualized Psychotherapy Treatment of Young People with Mental Disorders” (TREATme), funded by the European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST), we will conduct a systematic review to summarize the existing knowledge on mediators of treatment outcome and theories of change in psychotherapy for young people with personality disorders. In particular, we will evaluate whether mediators appear to be common or specific to particular age groups, treatment models, or outcome domains (e.g., psychosocial functioning, life quality, and adverse treatment effects).Method: We will follow the reporting guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement recommendations. Electronic databases (PubMed and PsycINFO) have been systematically searched for prospective, longitudinal, and case–control designs of psychological treatment studies, which examine mediators published in English. Participants will be young people between 10 and 30years of age who suffer from subclinical personality symptoms or have a personality disorder diagnosis and receive an intervention that aims at preventing, ameliorating, and/or treating psychological problems.Results: The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and at conference presentations and will be shared with relevant stakeholder groups. The data set will be made available to other research groups following recommendations of the open science initiative. Databases with the systematic search will be made openly available following open science initiatives. The review has been registered in PROSPERO (evaluation is pending, registration number ID 248959).Implications: This review will deliver a comprehensive overview on the empirical basis to contribute to the further development of psychological treatments for young people with personality disorders.

scholarly journals Mediators and theories of change in psychotherapy with adolescents: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. e042411
Author(s):  
Svenja Taubner ◽  
Andrea Saliba ◽  
Erkki Heinonen ◽  
Sonja Protić ◽  
Jana Volkert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Theories Of Change ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Prospective Longitudinal

IntroductionApproximately 75% of mental disorders emerge before the age of 25 years but less than half receive appropriate treatment. Little is known about the mechanisms underlying the therapeutic change of adolescents in psychotherapy. The ‘European Network of Individualised Psychotherapy Treatment of Young People with Mental Disorders’, funded by the European Cooperation in Science and Technology, will conduct the first systematic review to summarise the existing knowledge on mediators and theories of change in psychotherapy for adolescents.MethodA systematic review will be conducted, conforming to the reporting guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement recommendations. Electronic databases (PubMed and PsycINFO) have been systematically searched on 23 February 2020, for prospective, longitudinal and case-control designs which examine mediators of change. Participants will be adolescents between 10 and 19 years of age who suffer from a mental disorder or psychological difficulties and receive an intervention that aims at preventing, ameliorating and/or treating psychological problems.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for this systematic review as no primary data will be collected. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journals and at conference presentations and will be shared with stakeholder groups. The whole data set will be offered to other research groups following recommendations of the open science initiative. Databases with the systematic search will be made openly available following open science initiatives.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020177535.

scholarly journals Theories of Change and Mediators of Psychotherapy Effectiveness in Adolescents With Externalising Behaviours: A Systematic Review

2022 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
José M. Mestre ◽  
Svenja Taubner ◽  
Catarina Pinheiro Mota ◽  
Margarida Rangel Henriques ◽  
Andrea Saliba ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychological Treatment ◽  
Psychological Treatments ◽  
Positive Balance ◽  
Externalising Behaviours ◽  
Externalising Symptoms ◽  
Theories Of Change ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Family Variables ◽  
Meta Analyses

BackgroundExternalising behaviours are becoming a remarkably prevalent problem during adolescence, often precipitating both externalising and internalising disorders in later adulthood. Psychological treatments aim to increase the social functioning of adolescents in order for them to live a more balanced life and prevent these negative trajectories. However, little is known of the intervening variables and mediators involved in these treatments' change mechanisms. We conducted a systematic review, exploring the available evidence on mediators of psychological treatments for externalising behaviours and symptoms amongst adolescents (10 to 19 years old).MethodsA systematic search was performed on Medline and PsycINFO databases, which identified studies from inception to February 23, 2020. Eligible studies included randomised controlled trials that enrolled adolescents with externalising symptoms and behaviours as, at least, one of the primary outcomes. A group of 20 reviewers from the COST-Action TREATme (CA16102) were divided into 10 pairs. Each pair independently screened studies for inclusion, extracted information from the included studies, and assessed the methodological quality of the included studies and the requirements for mediators, following Kazdin's criteria. Risk of bias of RCTs was assessed by the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Extracted data from the included studies were reported using a narrative synthesis.ResultsFollowing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (PRISMA), after removing duplicates, 3,660 articles were screened. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. In a second stage, 965 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. A total of 14 studies fulfilled all inclusion criteria. The majority were related to systemic psychological treatment approaches. Two types of mediators were identified as potentially being involved in the mechanisms of change for better social improvements of adolescents: to increase healthier parent–adolescent relationships and parental discipline. However, there were significant and non-significant results amongst the same mediators, which led to discussing the results tentatively.ConclusionsFamily variables were found to be the largest group of investigated mediators, followed by relational, behavioural, and emotional variables. No cognitive or treatment-specific mediators were identified. Both adequate behavioural control of adolescents' peer behaviour and a better positive balance in their relationships with their parents seemed to buffer the effects of externalising behaviours in adolescents. Several methodological limitations concerning mediation testing design, outcome measures, and mediator selection have been identified.Ethics and DisseminationEthical approval was not required. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021231835.

scholarly journals Long-term outcomes of psychological treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Maxi Weber ◽  
Sarah Schumacher ◽  
Wiebke Hannig ◽  
Jürgen Barth ◽  
Annett Lotzin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
Stress Disorder ◽  
Psychological Treatment ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Long Term Outcomes ◽  
Psychological Treatments

Abstract Several types of psychological treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are considered well established and effective, but evidence of their long-term efficacy is limited. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the long-term outcomes across psychological treatments for PTSD. MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, PTSDpubs, PsycINFO, PSYNDEX, and related articles were searched for randomized controlled trials with at least 12 months of follow-up. Twenty-two studies (N = 2638) met inclusion criteria, and 43 comparisons of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) were available at follow-up. Active treatments for PTSD yielded large effect sizes from pretest to follow-up and a small controlled effect size compared with non-directive control groups at follow-up. Trauma-focused treatment (TFT) and non-TFT showed large improvements from pretest to follow-up, and effect sizes did not significantly differ from each other. Active treatments for comorbid depressive symptoms revealed small to medium effect sizes at follow-up, and improved PTSD and depressive symptoms remained stable from treatment end to follow-up. Military personnel, low proportion of female patients, and self-rated PTSD measures were associated with decreased effect sizes for PTSD at follow-up. The findings suggest that CBT for PTSD is efficacious in the long term. Future studies are needed to determine the lasting efficacy of other psychological treatments and to confirm benefits beyond 12-month follow-up.

scholarly journals Psychological treatment for depression and anxiety associated with dementia and mild cognitive impairment

2015 ◽  
Vol 207 (4) ◽  
pp. 286-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew H. Ford ◽  
Osvaldo P. Almeida
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Psychological Treatment ◽  
Quality Data ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Depression And Anxiety ◽  
Psychological Treatments ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Good Quality Data

SummaryDepression and anxiety are commonly associated with cognitive impairment. A systematic review of psychological treatments that appears in this issue of the Journal highlights the current paucity of good-quality data, but suggests these interventions hold promise. Given the increasing burden of dementia in our community, novel adequately powered randomised controlled trials in this area are urgently needed.

scholarly journals Psychological treatments for depression and anxiety in dementia and mild cognitive impairment: Systematic review and meta-analysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 207 (4) ◽  
pp. 293-298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vasiliki Orgeta ◽  
Afifa Qazi ◽  
Aimee Spector ◽  
Martin Orrell
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Mild Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Psychological Treatment ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Anxiety And Depression ◽  
Depression And Anxiety ◽  
Psychological Treatments ◽  
People With Dementia

BackgroundAnxiety and depression are common in people with dementia and mild cognitive impairment (MCI), but there is uncertainty about the effectiveness of both pharmacological and psychological therapies.AimsTo evaluate the evidence of effectiveness of psychological treatments in treating depression and anxiety in people with dementia and MCI.MethodWe carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of psychological treatment versus usual care in people with dementia and MCI. Primary outcomes were symptoms of anxiety and depression. Secondary outcomes were quality of life, ability to perform daily activities, neuropsychiatric symptoms, cognition and caregivers' self-rated depressive symptoms.ResultsWe included six RCTs, involving 439 participants with dementia, which used cognitive–behavioural therapy, interpersonal therapy, counselling or multimodal interventions including a specific psychological therapy. We found beneficial effects for both depression and anxiety. Overall, the quality of the evidence was moderate for depression and low for anxiety, due to the methodological limitations of the studies we identified and the limited number of trials.ConclusionsThe evidence from six RCTs suggests that psychological treatments are effective in reducing symptoms of depression and anxiety for people with dementia. There is a need for high-quality, multicentre trials including standardised, well-defined interventions.Declarations of interestA.Q., A.S. and M.O. are investigators in one of the included studies.

Psychological treatments for functional non-epileptic attacks: a systematic review

2009 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 158-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danielle Gaynor ◽  
Hannah Cock ◽  
Niruj Agrawal
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychological Treatment ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Epileptic Seizures ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Psychological Treatments ◽  
Psychogenic Seizures ◽  
Epileptic Attack ◽  
Behavioural Therapies ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Objective:There is a lack of clarity about the most useful intervention for functional non-epileptic attacks (FNEA). Outcomes for this condition remain often poor, with considerable personal, social and economic impact. In order to guide clinical practice and future research in this area, we have performed a systematic review of the published literature on the psychological treatment of FNEA.Methods:A comprehensive literature search was carried out using key words: non-epileptic seizures; psychogenic seizures; psychogenic non-epileptic seizures; pseudoseizures; funny turns; non-epileptic attack; hysterical seizures; and pseudoepileptic. Studies specifically looking at psychological treatment of FNEA were identified. Studies of patients also having comorbid organic seizure disorders were excluded.Results:17 studies that met the inclusion criteria were identified. A broad variety of psychological interventions for FNEA has been investigated. Only one randomised controlled trial has been completed to date. Existing evidence appears to suggest that various psychological treatments, including presenting the diagnosis, psychoeducation, behavioural therapies and mixed modality treatments, may be effective.Conclusion:While a range of psychological treatments may be beneficial for this patient group, we do not have clear evidence to suggest which treatment is most efficacious. Specific elements of presenting the diagnosis and psychoeducation may be required in addition to traditional cognitive behavioural therapeutic approaches. Large, methodologically robust studies are urgently required to establish the most effective form of treatment.

scholarly journals Examining risk factors for self-harm and suicide in LGBTQ+ young people: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. e031541
Author(s):  
A Jess Williams ◽  
Jon Arcelus ◽  
Ellen Townsend ◽  
Maria Michail
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Suicidal Ideation ◽  
Young People ◽  
Suicide Ideation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Self Harm ◽  
Prospective Longitudinal

IntroductionYoung people who identify as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer or Questioning (LGBTQ+) are at increased risk for self-harm, suicide ideation and behaviours. However, there has yet to be a comprehensive understanding of what risk factors influence these behaviours within LGBTQ+ young people as a whole. The purpose of this systematic review is to examine risk factors associated with self-harm, suicidal ideation and behaviour in LGBTQ+) young people.Methods and analysisA systematic review will be conducted, conforming to the reporting guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement recommendations. Electronic databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Web of Science) will be systematically searched for cross-sectional, prospective, longitudinal, cohort and case–control designs which examine risk factors for self-harm and/or suicidal ideation and behaviour in LGBTQ+ young people (aged 12–25 years). Only studies published in English will be included. No date restrictions will be applied. Study quality assessment will be conducted using the original and modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scales. Meta-analysis or narrative synthesis will be used, dependent on findings.Ethics and disseminationThis is a systematic review of published literature and thereby ethical approval was not sought. The review will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal, be publicly disseminated at conferences focusing on mental health, self-harm and suicide prevention. The findings will also be shared through public engagement and involvement, particularly those related to young LGBTQ+ individuals.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019130037.

Gender identity development in children and young people: A systematic review of longitudinal studies

2021 ◽  
pp. 135910452110026
Author(s):  
Hannah Stynes ◽  
Chloe Lane ◽  
Beth Pearson ◽  
Talen Wright ◽  
Veronica Ranieri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Young People ◽  
Identity Development ◽  
Gender Identity ◽  
Longitudinal Studies ◽  
Longitudinal Research ◽  
Small Samples ◽  
Children And Young People ◽  
Prospective Longitudinal ◽  
Over Time

Background: Children are presenting in greater numbers to gender clinics around the world. Prospective longitudinal research is important to better understand outcomes and trajectories for these children. This systematic review aims to identify, describe and critically evaluate longitudinal studies in the field. Method: Five electronic databases were systematically searched from January 2000 to February 2020. Peer-reviewed articles assessing gender identity and psychosocial outcomes for children and young people (<18 years) with gender diverse identification were included. Results: Nine articles from seven longitudinal studies were identified. The majority were assessed as being of moderate quality. Four studies were undertaken in the Netherlands, two in North America and one in the UK. The majority of studies had small samples, with only two studies including more than 100 participants and attrition was moderate to high, due to participants lost to follow-up. Outcomes of interest focused predominantly on gender identity over time and emotional and behavioural functioning. Conclusions: Larger scale and higher quality longitudinal research on gender identity development in children is needed. Some externally funded longitudinal studies are currently in progress internationally. Findings from these studies will enhance understanding of outcomes over time in relation to gender identity development in children and young people.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document