Cited by 45Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesDigital Mental Health Interventions

PREVENTING CHILD AND ADOLESCENT ANXIETY DISORDERS: OVERVIEW OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS: Review: Preventing Child and Adolescent Anxiety

Bennett, Kathryn, Manassis, Katharina, Duda, Stephanie, Bagnell, Alexa, Bernstein, Gail A., Garland, E. Jane, Miller, Lynn D., Newton, Amanda +2 more·2015·Depression and Anxiety

Abstract

Overviews of systematic reviews (OSRs) provide rapid access to high quality, consolidated research evidence about prevention intervention options, supporting evidence-informed decision-making, and the identification of fruitful areas of new research. This OSR addressed three questions about prevention strategies for child and adolescent anxiety: (1) Does the intervention prevent anxiety diagnosis and/or reduce anxiety symptoms compared to passive controls? (2) Is the intervention equal to or more effective than active controls? (3) What is the evidence quality (EQ) for the intervention? Prespecified inclusion criteria identified systematic reviews and meta-analyses (2000-2014) with an AMSTAR quality score ≥ 3/5. EQ was rated using Oxford evidence levels EQ1 (highest) to EQ5 (lowest). Three reviews met inclusion criteria. One narrative systematic review concluded school-based interventions reduce anxiety symptoms. One meta-analysis pooled 65 randomized controlled trials (RCTs; any intervention) and reported a small, statistically significant reduction in anxiety symptoms and diagnosis incidence. Neither review provided pooled effect size estimates for specific intervention options defined by type (i.e., universal/selective/indicated), intervention content, or comparison group (i.e., passive/active control), thus precluding EQ ratings. One meta-analysis pooled trials of vigorous exercise and reported small, nonstatistically significant reductions in anxiety symptoms for comparisons against passive and active controls (EQ1). Better use of primary studies in meta-analyses, including program-specific pooled effect size estimates and network meta-analysis is needed to guide evidence-informed anxiety prevention program choices. RCTs of innovative community/primary care based interventions and web-based strategies can fill knowledge gaps.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/da.22400

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Meta-analytic and review data show that indicated prevention programs for emotional problems are more promising than universal prevention.

    “Meta-analytic and review data of indicated prevention programs for emotional problems have shown them to be more promising than universal prevention, i.e., interventions targeting the general population (Bennett et al., 2015;Hugh-Jones et al., 2021;Lawrence et al., 2017;Teubert & Pinquart, 2011).”
  • Data from a meta-analytic review of CBT-based depression and anxiety prevention for at-risk adolescents suggest that current RCTs of such indicated prevention programs are scarce and suffer from methodological limitations, with only 16% including any active control condition.

    “However, data from a meta-analytic review of both depression and anxiety prevention based on CBT for at-risk adolescents suggests that current randomized control trials (RCT) of such indicated prevention programs are scarce and suffer from methodological limitations, with only 16% of the studies including any active control condition (ACC) at all (Bennett et al., 2015;van Doorn et al., 2021).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 42 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bennett, K., Manassis, K., Duda, S., Bagnell, A., Bernstein, G. A., Garland, E. J., Miller, L. D., Newton, A., Thabane, L., & Wilansky, P.
Affiliations
  • McMaster University (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Dalhousie University (CA)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
  • University of Alberta (CA)
Corresponding author
Bennett, Kathryn
Venue
Depression and Anxiety
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-08-18
Volume
32
Issue
12
Pages
909-918
ISSN
1091-4269 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2151959087
Cited by
45
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3
FWCI
0.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Depression and Anxiety (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Canadian Institutes of Health Research (KA1-119793)
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 › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
anxiety disorders, child and adolescent anxiety, prevention interventions, school-based intervention, exercise intervention, anxiety symptoms, quality of evidence, online intervention, community-based intervention
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Anxiety Disorders, Child, Female, Humans, Male, School Health Services

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