Cognitive behavioral program for the prevention of depression in at-risk adolescents: isolating the effects of dose.

IF 5 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH American journal of epidemiology Pub Date : 2025-01-08 DOI:10.1093/aje/kwae131
John F Dickerson, Greg Clarke, V Robin Weersing, Frances L Lynch, Steven D Hollon, David Brent, William Beardslee, Tracy R G Gladstone, Giovanna Porta, Lynn DeBar, Neon Brooks, Judy Garber
{"title":"Cognitive behavioral program for the prevention of depression in at-risk adolescents: isolating the effects of dose.","authors":"John F Dickerson, Greg Clarke, V Robin Weersing, Frances L Lynch, Steven D Hollon, David Brent, William Beardslee, Tracy R G Gladstone, Giovanna Porta, Lynn DeBar, Neon Brooks, Judy Garber","doi":"10.1093/aje/kwae131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The current study estimated effects of intervention dose (attendance) of a cognitive behavioral prevention (CBP) program on depression-free days (DFDs) in adolescent offspring of parents with a history of depression. As part of secondary analyses of a multisite randomized controlled trial, we analyzed the complete intention-to-treat sample of 316 at-risk adolescents ages 13 to 17 years. Youth were randomly assigned to the CBP program plus usual care (n = 159) or to usual care alone (n = 157). The CBP program involved 8 weekly acute sessions and 6 monthly continuation sessions. Results showed that higher CBP program dose predicted more DFDs, with a key threshold of approximately 75% of a full dose in analyses employing instrumental variable methodology to control multiple channels of bias. Specifically, attending at more than 75% of acute phase sessions led to 45.3 more DFDs over the 9-month period after randomization, which accounted for over 12% of the total follow-up days. Instrument sets were informed by study variables and external data, including weather and travel burden. In contrast, conventional analysis methods failed to find a significant dose-outcome relation. Application of the instrumental variable approach, which better controls the influence of confounding, demonstrated that higher CBP program dose resulted in more DFDs. This article is part of a Special Collection on Mental Health.</p>","PeriodicalId":7472,"journal":{"name":"American journal of epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":"19-26"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11735958/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwae131","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The current study estimated effects of intervention dose (attendance) of a cognitive behavioral prevention (CBP) program on depression-free days (DFDs) in adolescent offspring of parents with a history of depression. As part of secondary analyses of a multisite randomized controlled trial, we analyzed the complete intention-to-treat sample of 316 at-risk adolescents ages 13 to 17 years. Youth were randomly assigned to the CBP program plus usual care (n = 159) or to usual care alone (n = 157). The CBP program involved 8 weekly acute sessions and 6 monthly continuation sessions. Results showed that higher CBP program dose predicted more DFDs, with a key threshold of approximately 75% of a full dose in analyses employing instrumental variable methodology to control multiple channels of bias. Specifically, attending at more than 75% of acute phase sessions led to 45.3 more DFDs over the 9-month period after randomization, which accounted for over 12% of the total follow-up days. Instrument sets were informed by study variables and external data, including weather and travel burden. In contrast, conventional analysis methods failed to find a significant dose-outcome relation. Application of the instrumental variable approach, which better controls the influence of confounding, demonstrated that higher CBP program dose resulted in more DFDs. This article is part of a Special Collection on Mental Health.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
预防高危青少年抑郁症的认知行为计划:隔离剂量效应
本研究估算了认知行为预防(CBP)计划的干预剂量(出席率)对父母有抑郁症史的青少年后代无抑郁天数(DFD)的影响。作为多站点随机对照试验二次分析的一部分,我们分析了 316 名 13-17 岁高危青少年的完整意向治疗样本。青少年被随机分配到 CBP 项目和常规护理项目(159 人)或常规护理项目(157 人)。CBP项目包括每周8次急性疗程和每月6次持续疗程。结果显示,CBP 项目剂量越高,预测的 DFD 越多,在采用工具变量方法控制多种偏差渠道的分析中,关键阈值约为全剂量的 75%。具体来说,在随机化后的 9 个月内,参加超过 75% 的急性期课程会导致 DFD 天数增加 45.3 天,占总随访天数的 12% 以上。工具集参考了研究变量以及包括天气和旅行负担在内的外部数据。相比之下,传统的分析方法未能发现剂量与结果之间的显著关系。工具变量法能更好地控制混杂因素的影响,它的应用表明,CBP 计划的剂量越高,DFDs 就越多。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
American journal of epidemiology
American journal of epidemiology 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
221
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Epidemiology is the oldest and one of the premier epidemiologic journals devoted to the publication of empirical research findings, opinion pieces, and methodological developments in the field of epidemiologic research. It is a peer-reviewed journal aimed at both fellow epidemiologists and those who use epidemiologic data, including public health workers and clinicians.
期刊最新文献
Effects of US state paid family leave policies on perinatal and postpartum health: A quasi-experimental analysis. Employment quality and suicide, drug poisoning, and alcohol-attributable mortality. Fast-food and convenience outlets near schools in California: a comparison of private and public schools. Unclean cooking fuel use and sleep problems among adults aged 65 years and older from six countries. Exacerbation of racial disparities in COVID-19 outcomes by Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias among nursing home residents.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1