Cited by 49Mental Health Treatment and AccessSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesDigital Mental Health Interventions

Can a brief biologically-based psychoeducational intervention reduce stigma and increase help-seeking intentions for depression in young people? A randomised controlled trial

Howard, Kerry A, Griffiths, Kathleen M, McKetin, Rebecca, Ma, Jennifer·2018·Journal of Child & Adolescent Mental Health

Abstract

There is disagreement in the literature as to whether biological attribution increases or decreases stigma. This study investigated the effect of an online biological intervention on stigma and help-seeking intentions for depression among adolescents. A three-arm, pre-post test, double-blind randomised controlled trial (RCT) was used to compare the effects of a biological and a psychosocial intervention delivered online. Participants comprised secondary school students (N = 327) aged 16-19 years. Outcome measures included anticipated self-stigma for depression (primary), personal stigma, help-seeking intention for depression, and biological and psychosocial attribution. Neither the biological nor the psychosocial educational intervention significantly reduced anticipated self-stigma or personal stigma for depression relative to the control. However, a small increase in help-seeking intention for depression relative to the control was found for the biological educational condition. The study was undertaken over a single session and it is unknown whether the intervention effect on help-seeking intentions was sustained or would translate into help-seeking behaviour. A brief online biological education intervention did not alter stigma, but did promote a small increase in help-seeking intentions for depression among adolescents. This type of intervention may be a practical means for facilitating help-seeking among adolescents with current or future depression treatment needs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2989/17280583.2018.1467323

Cites

35 of 35 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Howard, K. A., Griffiths, K. M., McKetin, R., & Ma, J.
Affiliations
  • Mindfully Well, Canberra, Australia
  • Australian National University (AU)
Corresponding author
Ma, Jennifer
Venue
Journal of Child & Adolescent Mental Health
Published
2018-05-15
Volume
30
Issue
1
Pages
27-39
ISSN
  • 1728-0583 (ISSN-L)
  • 1728-0591
OpenAlex
W2803996239
Cited by
49
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3
FWCI
3.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Child and Adolescent Mental Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
  • eSpace (Curtin University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
depression stigma, help-seeking intentions, adolescents, psychosocial interventions, online psychoeducation, personal stigma, brief intervention, high school students
MeSH terms
Help-Seeking Behavior, Adolescent, Adult, Australia, Depression, Double-Blind Method, Female, Health Education, Humans, Male, Mental Health, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Personality, Self Concept, Intention, Young Adult, Social Stigma, Sociological Factors

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