Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 506

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prevention of Depression in At-Risk Adolescents: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
Garber, Judy, Clarke, Gregory N., Weersing, V. Robin, Beardslee, William R., Brent, David A., Gladstone, Tracy R. G., DeBar, Lynn L., Lynch, Frances L., D’Angelo, Eugene, Hollon, Steven D., Shamseddeen, Wael, Iyengar, Satish·2009·JAMA
DOI 10.1001/jama.2009.788
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

CONTEXT: Adolescent offspring of depressed parents are at markedly increased risk of developing depressive disorders. Although some smaller targeted prevention trials have found that depression risk can be reduced, these results have yet to be replicated and extended to large-scale, at-risk populations in different settings. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of a group cognitive behavioral (CB) prevention program compared with usual care in preventing the onset of depression. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A multicenter randomized controlled trial conducted in 4 US cities in which 316 adolescent (aged 13-17 years) offspring of parents with current or prior depressive disorders were recruited from August 2003 through February 2006. Adolescents had a past history of depression, current elevated but subdiagnostic depressive symptoms, or both. Assessments were conducted at baseline, after the 8-week intervention, and after the 6-month continuation phase. INTERVENTION: Adolescents were randomly assigned to the CB prevention program consisting of 8 weekly, 90-minute group sessions followed by 6 monthly continuation sessions or assigned to receive usual care alone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Rate and hazard ratio (HR) of a probable or definite depressive episode (ie, depressive symptom rating score of > or = 4) for at least 2 weeks as diagnosed by clinical interviewers. RESULTS: Through the postcontinuation session follow-up, the rate and HR of incident depressive episodes were lower for those in the CB prevention program than for those in usual care (21.4% vs 32.7%; HR, 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-0.98). Adolescents in the CB prevention program also showed significantly greater improvement in self-reported depressive symptoms than those in usual care (coefficient, -1.1; z = -2.2; P = .03). Current parental depression at baseline moderated intervention effects (HR, 5.98; 95% CI, 2.29-15.58; P = .001). Among adolescents whose parents were not depressed at baseline, the CB prevention program was more effective in preventing onset of depression than usual care (11.7% vs 40.5%; HR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.11-0.50), whereas for adolescents with a currently depressed parent, the CB prevention program was not more effective than usual care in preventing incident depression (31.2% vs 24.3%; HR, 1.43; 95% CI, 0.76-2.67). CONCLUSION: The CB prevention program had a significant prevention effect through the 9-month follow-up period based on both clinical diagnoses and self-reported depressive symptoms, but this effect was not evident for adolescents with a currently depressed parent. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00073671.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2009.788

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 11 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Garber, J., Clarke, G. N., Weersing, V. R., Beardslee, W. R., Brent, D. A., Gladstone, T. R. G., DeBar, L. L., Lynch, F. L., D’Angelo, E., Hollon, S. D., Shamseddeen, W., & Iyengar, S.
Venue
JAMA
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
2009-06-03
Volume
301
Issue
21
Pages
2215
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
DOI
10.1001/jama.2009.788
OpenAlex
W2059740079
Cited by
506
References
11
FWCI
53.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.