Cited by 553Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and Access

A meta-analytic review of depression prevention programs for children and adolescents: factors that predict magnitude of intervention effects

Open access
Stice, Eric, Shaw, Heather, Bohon, Cara, Marti, C. Nathan, Rohde, Paul·2009·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

Abstract

In this meta-analytic review, the authors summarized the effects of depression prevention programs for youth as well as investigated participant, intervention, provider, and research design features associated with larger effects. They identified 47 trials that evaluated 32 prevention programs, producing 60 intervention effect sizes. The average effect for depressive symptoms from pre-to-posttreatment (r = .15) and pretreatment to-follow-up (r = .11) were small, but 13 (41%) prevention programs produced significant reductions in depressive symptoms and 4 (13%) produced significant reductions in risk for future depressive disorder onset relative to control groups. Larger effects emerged for programs targeting high-risk individuals, samples with more females, samples with older adolescents, programs with a shorter duration and with homework assignments, and programs delivered by professional interventionists. Intervention content (e.g., a focus on problem-solving training or reducing negative cognitions) and design features (e.g., use of random assignment and structured interviews) were unrelated to effect sizes. Results suggest that depression prevention efforts produce a higher yield if they incorporate factors associated with larger intervention effects (e.g., selective programs with a shorter duration that include homework).

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 · 10.1037/a0015168

Cites

88 of 88 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?

  • The same meta-analysis found effect sizes at follow-up were Pearson's r = .11 (Cohen's d = .20).

    “Effect sizes at follow-up were Pearson’s r = .11 (Cohen’s d = .20), which is lower than the effect size found in the present study.”

    From Acceptance and commitment therapy universal prevention program for adolescents: a feasibility study. (2017) · cites this paper as [10]

    The Results section (“Average Effect Size and Effect Size Heterogeneity”; page unavailable) reports an average follow-up effect size of r = .11 across studies. The paper does not report a corresponding Cohen’s d = .20; its Methods section describes converting d values to r, so the parenthetical value is not verified by the cited text. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Early intervention programs targeting depression and other mental health-related problems have reported a reduction in efficacy from post-intervention to follow-up.

    “Early intervention programs targeting depression and other mental health-related problems have reported a reduction in efficacy from post-intervention to follow-up [10, 59].”

    From Acceptance and commitment therapy universal prevention program for adolescents: a feasibility study. (2017) · cites this paper as [10]

    The Discussion’s “Summary of Effect Sizes” reports that average effects for depression prevention programs fell from r = .14 at posttest to r = .10 at follow-up. The cited paper does not establish the same pattern for programs targeting other mental health-related problems. Page numbers are not available in the supplied copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Most early intervention programs for adolescents teach emotion regulation strategies based on CBT techniques.

    “Most early intervention programs for adolescents teach emotion regulation strategies based on the techniques espoused in Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT).”

    From A randomized controlled trial of strong minds: A school-based mental health program combining acceptance and commitment therapy and positive psychology (2016) · cites this paper as Stice et al., 2009

    The Abstract says most depression-prevention programs target negative cognitions, pleasant activities, social skills, and problem-solving deficits. The Program content section describes corresponding intervention skills, and the Results link cognitive-change content to CBT. The paper does not establish that most early intervention programs for adolescents specifically teach emotion-regulation strategies or use CBT techniques; its scope is depression prevention in children and adolescents. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The observed changes in the present study are similar in magnitude to changes observed in other early intervention programs utilizing CBT.

    “The observed changes in the present study are similar in magnitude to the changes observed in other early intervention programs utilizing CBT.”

    From A randomized controlled trial of strong minds: A school-based mental health program combining acceptance and commitment therapy and positive psychology (2016) · cites this paper as Stice, Shaw, Bohon, Marti, and Rohde (2009)

    The Results section (Average Effect Size and Effect Size Heterogeneity; page unavailable) reports small average effects for youth depression-prevention programs. The cited paper does not give a CBT-specific average in the retrieved passages, and it cannot establish whether those effects are similar in magnitude to the citing study’s observed changes. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Larger effects emerged for shorter than longer interventions in a meta-analysis for adolescent depression.

    “larger effects emerged for shorter than longer interventions in a meta-analysis for adolescent depression”

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: 6

  1. Burton EM Stice E Bearman SK Rohde P An experimental test of the affect-regulation model of bulimic symptoms and substance use: An affective intervention International Journal of Eating Disorders 2007 40 27 36 16958129 PMC1761129
  2. Cecchini TB An interpersonal and cognitive-behavioral approach to childhood depression: A school-based primary prevention study Dissertation Abstracts International 1998 58 12B 6803
  3. Gillham JE Preventing depression symptoms in school children Unpublished doctoral dissertation 1994 Philadelphia University of Pennsylvania
  4. Hedges LV Olkin I Statistical methods for meta-analysis 1985 Orlando, FL Academic Press
  5. Miller JB The effect of a cognitive-behavioral group intervention on depressive symptoms in an incarcerated adolescent delinquent population (juvenile delinquents) Unpublished doctoral dissertation 1999 Berkeley Wright Institute Graduate School of Psychology
  6. Stoppelbein L Primary prevention: An evaluation of a high-school based cognitive- behavioral program Dissertation Abstracts International 2004 64 8B 4066

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stice, E., Shaw, H., Bohon, C., Marti, C. N., & Rohde, P.
Affiliations
  • Oregon Research Institute (US)
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
  • University of Oregon (US)
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Published
2009-06
Volume
77
Issue
3
Pages
486-503
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
OpenAlex
W2043872160
Cited by
553
References
87
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 43 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 69 · 2015: 49 · 2014: 38 · 2013: 39 · 2012: 35
FWCI
30.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (MH 67183)
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
depression prevention, children, adolescents, depressive symptoms, intervention effect size, at-risk youth, homework, intervention duration, problem-solving training, negative thinking
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Age Factors, Child, Culture, Depressive Disorder, Major, Major Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Interview, Psychological, Male, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Practice, Psychological, Problem Solving, Risk Factors, Sex Factors, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Secondary Prevention, Young Adult

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