Non-pharmacological interventions aimed at promoting the mental health of children and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic
Quiroga, C. V.; Caobelli, A. C. S. L.; Rodrigues, G. V. A.; Viola, T. W.
Show abstract
BackgroundInterventions to promote mental health in pediatrics need to be effective, especially in crisis contexts. This systematic review proposes compile and analyze the findings of non-pharmacological interventions conducted in samples of children and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on mental health. MethodThe research was carried out in PsycINFO, PubMed and Web of Science databases for empirical studies, including interventions in which measures of outcome variables were collected at least twice (pre and post). The studies samples were children and adolescents up to 19 years old, and interventions were developed throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. After eligibility analyses, 16 studies were included in this review. ResultsStudies used different theoretical approaches, focusing on promotion, prevention and treatment in mental health in specifics contexts. Some were delivered online, in-person, or in hybrid formats. Particularly, depression, the most frequently assessed outcome, demonstrated more favorable results within the interventions. However, due to considerable risk of bias, the analysis of results of many included studies should be performed with caution. ConclusionsMost of the interventions necessitate further validation. However, the emergence of interventions during crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, provides an opportunity to expand evidence-based mental health practices, paving the way for their application in other crisis situations. Given that mental health prevention and promotion practices can be integrated into the roles of all healthcare providers, possessing insight into the most suitable evidence-based interventions can elevate the quality of care delivered.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Psychotherapies and Psychological Support for Individuals Facing Psychological Distress during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scoping Review 97%
- Systematic Review Protocol: The Effects of Theory-Based Interventions for Self-Help Practices in the Management of Mild to Moderate Depression 95%
- A One-Arm Pilot Trial of a Telehealth CBT-Based Group Intervention Targeting Transdiagnostic Risk for Emotional Distress 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- The association between academic pressure and adolescent mental health problems: A systematic review 95%
- Virtual mindfulness interventions to promote well-being in young adults: A mixed-methods systematic review 95%
- Closed Doors: Predictors of Stress, Anxiety, Depression, and PTSD During the Onset of COVID-19 Pandemic in Brazil 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Recovery from severe mental health problems: A systematic review of service user and informal caregiver perspectives 94%
- Priorities for Future Research about Screen Use and Adolescent Mental Health: A Participatory Prioritization Study 94%
- Evaluation of easy-to-implement anti-stress interventions in a series of N-of-1 trials: Study protocol of the Anti-Stress Intervention Among Physicians Study (ASIP) 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Problematic usage of the internet and eating disorders: a multifaceted, systematic review and meta-analysis 92%
- From smartphone data to clinically relevant predictions: A systematic review of digital phenotyping methods in depression 91%
- Noninvasive brain stimulation combined with evidence-based psychotherapy for psychiatric disorders: A meta-analysis of optimal implementation parameters 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on Mental Illness Symptoms in Spain in the COVID-19 Crisis 93%
- One Year of Evidence on Mental Health in the COVID-19 Crisis - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis 93%
- "What matters in help-seeking and disclosure intent of intimate partner violence during the COVID-19 pandemic:Similarities and differences across demographic groups" 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.