Cited by 139Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and Access

Brief Behavioral Therapy for Pediatric Anxiety and Depression in Primary Care: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Open access
Weersing, V. Robin, Brent, David A., Rozenman, Michelle S., Gonzalez, Araceli, Jeffreys, Megan, Dickerson, John F., Lynch, Frances L., Porta, Giovanna +1 more·2017·JAMA Psychiatry

Abstract

Importance: Anxiety and depression affect 30% of youth but are markedly undertreated compared with other mental disorders, especially in Hispanic populations. Objective: To examine whether a pediatrics-based behavioral intervention targeting anxiety and depression improves clinical outcome compared with referral to outpatient community mental health care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This 2-center randomized clinical trial with masked outcome assessment conducted between brief behavioral therapy (BBT) and assisted referral to care (ARC) studied 185 youths (aged 8.0-16.9 years) from 9 pediatric clinics in San Diego, California, and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, recruited from October 6, 2010, through December 5, 2014. Youths who met DSM-IV criteria for full or probable diagnoses of separation anxiety disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, social phobia, major depression, dysthymic disorder, and/or minor depression; lived with a consenting legal guardian for at least 6 months; and spoke English were included in the study. Exclusions included receipt of alternate treatment for anxiety or depression, presence of a suicidal plan, bipolar disorder, psychosis, posttraumatic stress disorder, substance dependence, current abuse, intellectual disability, or unstable serious physical illness. Interventions: The BBT consisted of 8 to 12 weekly 45-minute sessions of behavioral therapy delivered in pediatric clinics by master's-level clinicians. The ARC families received personalized referrals to mental health care and check-in calls to support accessing care from master's-level coordinators. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was clinically significant improvement on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale (score ≤2). Secondary outcomes included the Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale, Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised, and functioning. Results: A total of 185 patients were enrolled in the study (mean [SD] age, 11.3 [2.6] years; 107 [57.8%] female; 144 [77.8%] white; and 38 [20.7%] Hispanic). Youths in the BBT group (n = 95), compared with those in the ARC group (n = 90), had significantly higher rates of clinical improvement (56.8% vs 28.2%; χ21 = 13.09, P < .001; number needed to treat, 4), greater reductions in symptoms (F2,146 = 5.72; P = .004; Cohen f = 0.28), and better functioning (mean [SD], 68.5 [10.7] vs 61.9 [11.9]; t156 = 3.64; P < .001; Cohen d = 0.58). Ethnicity moderated outcomes, with Hispanic youth having substantially stronger response to BBT (76.5%) than ARC (7.1%) (χ21 = 14.90; P < .001; number needed to treat, 2). Effects were robust across sites. Conclusions and Relevance: A pediatric-based brief behavioral intervention for anxiety and depression is associated with benefits superior to those of assisted referral to outpatient mental health care. Effects were especially strong for Hispanic participants, suggesting that the protocol may be a useful tool in addressing ethnic disparities in care. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01147614.

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/jamapsychiatry.2017.0429

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Approaching feared situations without safety behaviors has shown promise in previous clinical trials and has been suggested as a way of creating more robust treatment outcomes for CBT for children and adolescents.

    “Approaching feared situations without safety behaviors has shown promise in previous clinical trials (e.g., Weersing et al., 2017) and has been suggested as a way of creating more robust treatment outcomes for CBT for children and adolescents (McGuire & Storch, 2018).”

    From Intolerance of Uncertainty–Focused Treatment for Adolescents With Excessive Worry: A Pilot Feasibility Study (2020) · cites this paper as Weersing et al., 2017

    The BBT Intervention section describes exposure as graded engagement in avoided activities, and the Discussion reports promising outcomes for the youth trial. Our copy does not say participants approached feared situations without safety behaviors, so the trial does not establish that specific element of the cited claim. The later suggestion about more robust CBT outcomes is attributed to McGuire and Storch, not Weersing et al. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Angold A, Costello EJ, Erkanli A. Comorbidity. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1999;40(1):57-87.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Weersing, V. R., Brent, D. A., Rozenman, M. S., Gonzalez, A., Jeffreys, M., Dickerson, J. F., Lynch, F. L., Porta, G., & Iyengar, S.
Affiliations
  • San Diego State University (US)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Department of Psychology, California State University, Long Beach
  • Kaiser Permanente (US)
Corresponding author
Weersing, V. Robin
Venue
JAMA Psychiatry
Published
2017-06-01
Volume
74
Issue
6
Pages
571
ISSN
2168-622X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2607380814
Cited by
139
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 5
FWCI
15.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (UL1TR000124, UL1TR001881)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH084935, R01MH084916)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
childhood anxiety, childhood depression, primary care mental health, community mental health services, separation anxiety disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, social anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, Latino youth, underserved populations, access to mental health care, symptom relief, functional improvement, child and adolescent psychiatry
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Anxiety Disorders, Behavior Therapy, California, Child, Depressive Disorder, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Psychotherapy, Brief, Referral and Consultation

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