Cited by 136Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 86 of the 86 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 2 of the 118 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

A meta-analysis of emotional regulation outcomes in psychological interventions for youth with depression and anxiety

Open access

Abstract

Difficulties in applying emotional regulation (ER) skills are associated with depression and anxiety symptoms, and are common targets of treatment. This meta-analysis examined whether improvements in ER skills were associated with psychological treatment outcomes for depression and/or anxiety in youth. A multivariate, random-effects meta-analysis was run using metafor in R. Inclusion criteria included studies that were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of a psychological intervention for depression and/or anxiety in patients aged 14–24, were peer reviewed, were written in English, measured depression and/or anxiety symptoms as an outcome and measured ER as an outcome. Medline, Embase, APA PsycInfo, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library were searched up to 26 June 2020. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. The meta-analysis includes 385 effect sizes from 90 RCTs with total N = 11,652. Psychological treatments significantly reduced depression, anxiety, emotion dysregulation (k = 13, Hedges’ g = 0.54, P < 0.001, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.30–0.78) and disengagement ER (k = 83, g = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.15–0.32, P < 0.001); engagement ER also increased (k = 82, g = 0.26, 95% CI = 0.15–0.32, P < 0.001). Improvements in depression and anxiety were positively associated with improved engagement ER skills, reduced emotion dysregulation and reduced disengagement ER skills. Sensitivity considered study selection and publication bias. Longer treatments, group formats and cognitive-behavioural orientations produced larger positive associations between improved ER skills and reduced symptoms. ER skill improvement is linked to depression and anxiety across a broad range of interventions for youth. Limitations of the current study include reliance on self-report measures, content overlap between variables and inability to test the directionality of associations. In this meta-analysis of 90 randomized controlled trials of youth psychological treatment, Daros et al. show that a reduction in depression and anxiety symptoms is associated with improvements in emotional regulation skills.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41562-021-01191-9

Cites

86 of 86 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

16 tests recomputed · 0 with the reported and recomputed p on opposite sides of .05

Verification

Claims the paper makes

72 Own result · 48 Not checked yet · 45 Own method · 23 Own interpretation · 12 No basis given · 1 Supported so far · accuracy not yet measured

Verify all 116 references — free account
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 46
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 62
87 of 87
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A gap exists because few studies or reviews have examined multiple emotion regulation indices for specificity, and systematic reviews and meta-analyses have rarely tested whether emotion regulation skill gains relate to depression and anxiety treatment outcomes in young people.

    “While ER skills training may be a key factor to consider in treatment outcomes for depressive and anxiety disorders, few of these studies or reviews have considered multiple indices of ER for enhanced specificity. Moreover, systematic reviews and meta-analyses have less often examined whether improvement in ER skills are associated with depression and anxiety treatment outcomes in young persons.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Contextual emotion regulation use is harder to measure than habitual emotion regulation use.

    “However, contextual use of ER skills remains difficult to measure versus habitual ER skill use.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The included studies' measures of depression, anxiety, and ER skills validly and comparably capture the constructs they are intended to measure.

    “relying almost entirely on data from self-report measures, which can be susceptible to recall bias.61”
    “We included studies that incorporated a general measure of emotion dysregulation (e.g., ER skills deficits) and/or a specific measure of ER skills, based on previous expert reviews”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The psychological interventions included are sufficiently similar in their ER-related mechanisms to be pooled in a meta-analysis.

    “We defined a psychological intervention as any evidence-based intervention that was grounded in psychological principles to reduce symptoms of anxiety and/or depression.”
    “difficulty in dividing the studies into distinct categories based on therapeutic orientation.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The observed associations between ER skill improvements and symptom reductions reflect treatment-related change rather than reverse causation or overlapping constructs.

    “we were unable to examine more causal relationships”
    “whether changes in depression and anxiety are caused by changes in ER skills or the opposite”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Cognitive training interventions are usually delivered as brief single-session treatments.

    “cognitive training interventions are usually delivered as brief treatments (i.e., single-session)”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The youth advisory board's perspectives are relevant to the broader youth population.

    “Our youth advisory board highlighted the utility of framing depression and anxiety as problems with ER to reduce the stigma regarding the disorders”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Randomized controlled trials have a rigorous study design.

    “primary analyses were conducted on data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) due to their rigorous study design”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The design of non-randomized studies automatically introduces multiple concerns with respect to randomization and participant allocation.

    “Because the design of non-RCTs would automatically introduce multiple concerns with respect to randomization and participant allocation”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Included studies are from populations of studies that differ from each other systematically.

    “Random-effects models were used, which assume that included studies are from populations of studies that differ from each other systematically.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The random effects follow a multivariate normal distribution.

    “These computed correlations represent the estimated restricted maximum likelihood relationship between two random effects, which are assumed to follow a multivariate normal distribution.”
11 of 11

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?

Statistics that don’t add up

Each reported p-value recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom.

2 of 2

Statistics recomputed

Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.

  • Doesn’t add upχ²(1) = 10.54reported p = .012 · recomputed p = .001

    “χ2(1)=10.54, p = .012”

  • Doesn’t add upχ²(1) = 13.05reported p = .003 · recomputed p < .001

    “χ2(1)=13.05, p = .003”

  • Consistentχ²(1) = 20.92reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “χ2(1)=20.92, p < .001”

  • Consistentχ²(1) = 35.96reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “χ2(1)=35.96, p < .001”

  • Consistentχ²(1) = 8.5reported p = .004 · recomputed p = .004

    “χ2(1)=8.50, p = .004”

  • Consistentχ²(1) = 20.29reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “χ2(1)=20.29, p < .001”

  • Consistentχ²(6) = 53.96reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “χ2(6)=53.96, p < .001”

  • Consistentt(65) = 4.25reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “t(65)=4.25, p < .001”

  • Consistentt(78) = 4.79reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “t(78)=4.79, p < .001”

  • Consistentχ²(1) = 5.48reported p = .019 · recomputed p = .019

    “χ2(1)=5.48, p = .019”

  • Consistentχ²(1) = 9.39reported p = .002 · recomputed p = .002

    “χ2(1)=9.39, p = .002”

  • Consistentχ²(1) = 31.13reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “χ2(1)=31.13, p < .001”

  • Consistentχ²(1) = 22.29reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “χ2(1)=22.29, p < .001”

  • Consistentχ²(1) < 0.1reported p > .99 · recomputed p = .752

    “χ2(1)<0.1, p > .99”

  • Consistentχ²(1) = 2.33reported p = .13 · recomputed p = .127

    “χ2(1)=2.33, p = .13”

  • Consistentχ²(6) = 40.6reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “χ2(6)=40.60, p < .001”

16 of 16

Self-check

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

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Show all 86 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Zelazo, P. D. & Cunningham, W. A. in Handbook of Emotion Regulation (ed. Gross, J. J.) 135–158 (Guilford Press, 2007).
  2. Thompson, R. A. & Waters, S. F. in The Oxford Handbook of Emotion Dysregulation (eds Beauchaine, T. P. & Crowell, S. E.) 99–114 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2020).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 136

Metadata

Authors
Daros, A. R., Haefner, S. A., Asadi, S., Kazi, S., Rodak, T., & Quilty, L. C.
Affiliations
Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CA)
Corresponding author
Daros, Alexander R.
Venue
Nature Human Behaviour
Published
2021-09-20
Volume
5
Issue
10
Pages
1443-1457
ISSN
2397-3374 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3198995769
Cited by
136
References
86
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 2
FWCI
2.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Human Behaviour (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (acceptedVersion)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Wellcome Trust (Active Ingredients 2020)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
Keywords
emotion regulation, adolescent depression, youth anxiety, psychological intervention, emotional dysregulation, disengagement, engagement, treatment outcomes, cognitive behavioral therapy, group therapy, treatment duration
MeSH terms
Emotional Regulation, Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Anxiety, Depression, Humans, Psychological Techniques, Treatment Outcome

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-04, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-04 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

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