The Effectiveness of School Mental Health Literacy Programs to Address Knowledge, Attitudes and Help Seeking among Youth
Abstract
AIM: Conduct a systematic review for the effectiveness of school mental health literacy programs to enhance knowledge, reduce stigmatizing attitudes and improve help-seeking behaviours among youth (12-25 years of age). METHODS: Reviewers independently searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, ERIC, grey literature and reference lists of included studies. They reached a consensus on the included studies, and rated the risk of bias of each study. Studies that reported three outcomes: knowledge acquisition, stigmatizing attitudes and help-seeking behaviours; and were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs, quasi-experimental studies, and controlled-before-and-after studies, were eligible. RESULTS: This review resulted in 27 articles including 5 RCTs, 13 quasi-experimental studies, and 9 controlled-before-and-after studies. Whereas most included studies claimed school-based mental health literacy programs improve knowledge, attitudes and help-seeking behaviour, 17 studies met criteria for high risk of bias, 10 studies for moderate risk of bias, and no studies for low risk of bias. Common limitations included the lack of randomization, control for confounding factors, validated measures and report on attrition in most studies. The overall quality of the evidence for knowledge and help-seeking behaviour outcomes was very low, and low for the attitude outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Research into school-based mental health literacy is still in its infancy and there is insufficient evidence to claim for positive impact of school mental health literacy programs on knowledge improvement, attitudinal change or help-seeking behaviour. Future research should focus on methods to appropriately determine the evidence of effectiveness on school-based mental health literacy programs, considering the values of both RCTs and other research designs in this approach. Educators should consider the strengths and weaknesses of current mental health literacy programs to inform decisions regarding possible implementation.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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 finding that enhancing MHL did not improve mental health outcomes is consistent with the results of a systematic review in the school setting.
“This is consistent with the results of a systematic review in the school setting [42].”
From Mental health literacy intervention on help-seeking in athletes: a systematic review (2020) · cites this paper as [42]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 42 · Cited by 290
- Authors
- Wei, Y., Hayden, J. A., Kutcher, S., Zygmunt, A., & McGrath, P.
- Affiliations
- Dalhousie University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Wei, Yifeng
- Venue
- Early Intervention in Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-01-24
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 109-121
- ISSN
- 1751-7885 (ISSN-L)
- 1751-7893
- OpenAlex
- W2167431261
- Cited by
- 290
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2026: 26 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 1.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Early Intervention in Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › School Health and Nursing Education
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
- Keywords
- mental health literacy, school-based intervention, youth, help-seeking, stigma, mental health knowledge, attitudes toward mental illness, program effectiveness, risk of bias
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adolescent Behavior, Health Education, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Mental Health, Health Literacy, Social Stigma
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