CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 110Digital Mental Health InterventionsMental Health Treatment and AccessAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 97 of the 97 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Universal and Indicated Preventive Technology-Delivered Interventions for Higher Education Students

Conley, Colleen S., Durlak, Joseph A., Shapiro, Jenna B., Kirsch, Alexandra C., Zahniser, Evan·2016·Prevention Science
DOI 10.1007/s11121-016-0662-3
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The uses of technology-delivered mental health treatment options, such as interventions delivered via computer, smart phone, or other communication or information devices, as opposed to primarily face-to-face interventions, are proliferating. However, the literature is unclear about their effectiveness as preventive interventions for higher education students, a population for whom technology-delivered interventions (TDIs) might be particularly fitting and beneficial. This meta-analytic review examines technological mental health prevention programs targeting higher education students either without any presenting problems (universal prevention) or with mild to moderate subclinical problems (indicated prevention). A systematic literature search identified 22 universal and 26 indicated controlled interventions, both published and unpublished, involving 4763 college, graduate, or professional students. As hypothesized, the overall mean effect sizes (ESs) for both universal (0.19) and indicated interventions (0.37) were statistically significant and differed significantly from each other favoring indicated interventions. Skill-training interventions, both universal (0.21) and indicated (0.31), were significant, whereas non-skill-training interventions were only significant among indicated (0.25) programs. For indicated interventions, better outcomes were obtained in those cases in which participants had access to support during the course of the intervention, either in person or through technology (e.g., email, online contact). The positive findings for both universal and indicated prevention are qualified by limitations of the current literature. To improve experimental rigor, future research should provide detailed information on the level of achieved implementation, describe participant characteristics and intervention content, explore the impact of potential moderators and mechanisms of success, collect post-intervention and follow-up data regardless of intervention completion, and use analysis strategies that allow for inclusion of cases with partially missing data.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11121-016-0662-3

Cites

97 of 97 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J., & Rothstein, H. (2014). Comprehensive meta-analysis version 3 [computer software]. Englewood, NJ: Biostat.
  2. Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality. (2014). Results from the 2013 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Mental health findings (HHS Publication No. SMA 14–4887; NSDUH Series H–49). Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
  3. * Grassi, A., Preziosa, A., Villani, D., & Riva, G. (2007). A relaxing journey: The use of mobile phones for well-being improvement. Annual Review of Cyber Therapy and Telemedicine, 5, 123–131.
  4. * Grey, N. E. (2013). An evaluation of coping interventions and gender-specific implications for college student stress and health. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 74(10-B).
  5. Peters, H. O. (2013). Social connections: Internet prevention of loneliness and depression in first year university students. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 74(12-B).
  6. Shapiro, J., Kirsch, A., Conley, C., & Durlak, J. (2015). Preliminary findings from a meta-analysis of indicated mental health prevention programs for at-risk higher education students. Orlando, FL: Poster presented at the 2015 annual meeting of the American College Health Association.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 110

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Conley, C. S., Durlak, J. A., Shapiro, J. B., Kirsch, A. C., & Zahniser, E.
Affiliations
Loyola University Chicago (US)
Corresponding author
Conley, Colleen S.
ORCID
Venue
Prevention Science
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2016-05-26
Volume
17
Issue
6
Pages
659-678
ISSN
  • 1389-4986 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6695
DOI
10.1007/s11121-016-0662-3
OpenAlex
W2401775412
Cited by
110
References
97
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5
FWCI
1.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Prevention Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
technology-based interventions, mental health prevention, universal prevention, indicated prevention, university students, online mental health services, implementation fidelity
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Male, Mental Health, Preventive Medicine, Students, Telecommunications, Universities

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