Effectiveness of technology‐based psychosocial interventions for child, adolescents and young adults undergoing cancer treatment: A meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cigdem Sari Ozturk ◽  
Ebru Kilicarslan Toruner
Keyword(s):  
Young Adults ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Psychosocial Interventions ◽  
Adolescents And Young Adults ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Treating depression with physical activity in adolescents and young adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2017 ◽  
Vol 48 (7) ◽  
pp. 1068-1083 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. P. Bailey ◽  
S. E. Hetrick ◽  
S. Rosenbaum ◽  
R. Purcell ◽  
A. G. Parker
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Young Adults ◽  
Treatment Effect ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Adolescents And Young Adults ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomised Controlled

AbstractWe aimed to establish the treatment effect of physical activity for depression in young people through meta-analysis. Four databases were searched to September 2016 for randomised controlled trials of physical activity interventions for adolescents and young adults, 12–25 years, experiencing a diagnosis or threshold symptoms of depression. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to estimate the standardised mean difference (SMD) between physical activity and control conditions. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression investigated potential treatment effect modifiers. Acceptability was estimated using dropout. Trials were assessed against risk of bias domains and overall quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE criteria. Seventeen trials were eligible and 16 provided data from 771 participants showing a large effect of physical activity on depression symptoms compared to controls (SMD = −0.82, 95% CI = −1.02 to −0.61, p < 0.05, I2 = 38%). The effect remained robust in trials with clinical samples (k = 5, SMD = −0.72, 95% CI = −1.15 to −0.30), and in trials using attention/activity placebo controls (k = 7, SMD = −0.82, 95% CI = −1.05 to −0.59). Dropout was 11% across physical activity arms and equivalent in controls (k = 12, RD = −0.01, 95% CI = −0.04 to 0.03, p = 0.70). However, the quality of RCT-level evidence contributing to the primary analysis was downgraded two levels to LOW (trial-level risk of bias, suspected publication bias), suggesting uncertainty in the size of effect and caution in its interpretation. While physical activity appears to be a promising and acceptable intervention for adolescents and young adults experiencing depression, robust clinical effectiveness trials that minimise risk of bias are required to increase confidence in the current finding. The specific intervention characteristics required to improve depression remain unclear, however best candidates given current evidence may include, but are not limited to, supervised, aerobic-based activity of moderate-to-vigorous intensity, engaged in multiple times per week over eight or more weeks. Further research is needed. (Registration: PROSPERO-CRD 42015024388).

scholarly journals The impact of psychosocial interventions on condom and contraceptive use in LMICs: Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (8) ◽  
pp. 1182-1199
Author(s):  
Elena M. C. Riedel ◽  
David T. Turner ◽  
Loulou Hassan Kobeissi ◽  
Eirini Karyotaki ◽  
Lale Say ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Contraceptive Use ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Psychosocial Interventions ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals Effectiveness of online interventions in preventing depression: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (11) ◽  
pp. e022012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alina Rigabert ◽  
Emma Motrico ◽  
Patricia Moreno-Peral ◽  
Davinia M Resurrección ◽  
Sonia Conejo-Cerón ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Random Effect ◽  
Psychosocial Interventions ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Online Interventions ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionAlthough evidence exists for the efficacy of psychosocial interventions in preventing depression, little is known about its prevention through online interventions. The objective of this study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of online interventions in preventing depression in heterogeneous populations.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials that will be identified through searches of PubMed, PsycINFO, WOS, Scopus, OpenGrey, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov and Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Register . We will also search the reference lists provided in relevant studies and reviews. Experts in the field will be contacted to obtain more references. Two independent reviewers will assess the eligibility criteria of all articles, extract data and determine their risk of bias (Cochrane Collaboration Tool). Baseline depression will be required to have been discarded through standardised interviews or validated self-reports with standard cut-off points. The outcomes will be the incidence of new cases of depression and/or the reduction of depressive symptoms as measured by validated instruments. Pooled standardised mean differences will be calculated using random-effect models. Heterogeneity and publication bias will be estimated. Predefined sensitivity and subgroup analyses will be performed. If heterogeneity is relevant, random-effect meta-regression will be performed.Ethics and disseminationThe results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and will be presented at a professional conference. Ethical assessment is not required as we will search and assess existing sources of literature.Trial registration numberCRD42014014804; Results.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of psychological, psychoeducational and psychosocial interventions to prevent postpartum depression in adolescent and adult mothers: study protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. e034424 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carmen Martín-Gómez ◽  
Patricia Moreno-Peral ◽  
Juan A Bellón ◽  
Sonia Conejo Cerón ◽  
Henar Campos-Paino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Postpartum Depression ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Psychosocial Interventions ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Clinical Trial Registry ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionThe prevalence of postpartum depression (PPD) is 17%, and the incidence is 12% worldwide. Adverse consequences for mothers and babies have been associated with this disease. To assess the effectiveness of psychological, psychoeducational and psychosocial interventions in preventing PPD, a systematic review and meta-analysis (SR/MA) will be conducted.Methods and analysisA SR/MA will be performed following the indications of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies will be identified through MEDLINE (Ovid and PubMed), PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, OpenGrey, Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov and evidencebasedtherapy.org from inception until 31 January 2020. Bridging searches will be also conducted until the review is completed. The selection criteria will be as follows: (1) subjects will be pregnant females or females who have given birth in the last 12 months and who were non-depressive at baseline; (2) psychological, psychoeducational and psychosocial interventions; (3) comparator will be usual care, attention control, waiting list or no intervention; (4) outcomes will be specific results on PPD; and (5) the design of the studies will be randomised controlled trials. No restrictions regarding the year of publication, the setting of the intervention or the language of publication will be considered. Pooled standardised mean differences and 95% CIs will be calculated. The risk of bias of the studies will be assessed through the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool. Heterogeneity between the studies will be determined by the I2 and Cochran’s Q statistics. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses will also be performed. Publication bias will be checked with funnel plots and Egger’s test. Heterogeneity will be explored by random-effects meta-regression analysis.Ethics and disseminationThe ethical assessment was not required. The results will be presented at conferences and disseminated through publications.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018109981.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document