Child and Adolescent Mental Health最新文献

Background: Youth is a transitional period from 15 to 24 years involving developmental milestones that may be adversely affected by mental health (MH) concerns. Clinical interventions tend to focus on the reduction or cure of illness-based psychiatric symptoms. However, national and international mental policy focuses on promoting well-being and self-management through personal recovery. The leading framework of personal recovery in adults is CHIME, an acronym used to denote five key processes - Connectedness, Hope, Identity, Meaning and Empowerment. The extent to which CHIME reflects the experience of personal recovery in youth is under-researched, yet the framework often underpins youth mental health services.

Method: The present study uses a qualitative methodology to analyse interviews with 16 youth referred for treatment. Interviews focused on the lived experiences of youth recovery and its alignment with the CHIME processes and were analysed using a hybrid inductive and deductive reflexive thematic analysis.

Results: The CHIME framework was relevant to youth recovery in two ways: restoring what was perceived to be lost (restorative processes) and encouraging resilience (resilience processes). Adaptations to the CHIME framework for youth included an increased emphasis on the role of family and friends, support for grieving processes and support for identity formation during the recovery journey.

Conclusion: An adapted CHIME framework for youth can underpin targeted recovery-oriented care to support youth in moving towards emerging adulthood successfully while managing mental health concerns.

The journal's recent debate series ('are we overpathologising young people's mental health?') featured compelling articles regarding the pathologisation of emotional distress in young people. Much of the concern over overpathologising is that young people are overpathologising their own mental health (i.e. identifying as having mental illnesses when they are actually experiencing normative, non-clinical levels of emotional distress; Foulkes & Andrews, New Ideas Psychol., 69, 2023, 101010). I wish to briefly share a relevant finding from a recent study (on mental illness self-labelling in late adolescence) and highlight ways that new empirical work can move this debate forward.

Artificial intelligence may be able to improve the efficiency, accuracy and predictiveness of mental health assessments, and public perspectives are crucial to ensuring these tools are implemented with fairness and accountability. We developed an artificial intelligence-driven tool to automatically analyse parents' speech data, which if successful could be implemented in children and young people's mental health assessments. To engage stakeholders with this project, we worked with a science fiction writer to produce two stories about possible futures of our tool, which we discussed in workshops with young people and parents. Here, we summarise key themes arising from this novel method of engaging the public in mental health research, and highlight considerations for clinicians and researchers creating novel technologies for children and young people's mental healthcare.

Background: Suicide is the fourth leading cause of death in adolescents globally. Post-primary school-based suicide prevention (PSSP) interventions are an evidence-based suicide prevention strategy. However, adolescents' experiences with PSSP interventions are not well understood but are arguably critical to ensuring PSSP interventions have their intended impacts on adolescent mental health. No known review synthesising adolescents' PSSP intervention experiences exists. The objective of the meta-ethnography review is to explore the perspectives and experiences of adolescents engaging with PSSP interventions, as participants/end-users, intervention advisors, facilitators, co-designers and co-researchers.

Method: A peer-reviewed meta-ethnography protocol has been published. The meta-ethnographic approach followed Noblit and Hare's seven-stage process for conducting meta-ethnography and adhered to the eMERGe reporting and the PRISMA statement guidelines. Searches of nine databases identified journal articles and dissertations. Study quality appraisal was undertaken in duplicate using the CASP checklist.

Results: Sixteen journal articles and dissertations were retained for analysis. Adolescents were engaged in PSSP interventions as end-users, co-creators and peer helpers. Reciprocal translations and lines of argument (LOA) synthesis reveal the importance of the following aspects of engaging with PSSP interventions: (1) how adolescents were engaged; (2) trust in facilitators, peers, school personnel and schools; and (3) personal experience sharing for connection and engagement. Our findings demonstrate the intersection between school contexts and adolescents' experiences with PSSP interventions.

Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first review to synthesise qualitative findings of adolescents' experiences with engaging with PSSP interventions. Understanding and harnessing adolescents' perspectives is key for enhancing PSSP intervention effectiveness and implementation. Our findings are relevant to broader health-related fields and practice, particularly given the increasing calls for youth voice.

Background: Neurodevelopmental disorders like autism and ADHD may disrupt family and child functioning. Although well-established psychosocial treatment programs exist, access to these interventions remains limited for many families. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) primarily evaluates the effectiveness of an online psychosocial program (INPSYD) in improving parental domains (stress, coping, and social support). The secondary aim is to assess its effects on children's domains, including behavior, executive functioning, sleep, and family dynamics.

Methods: This study employed a two-arm, mixed-methods RCT design involving families of children diagnosed with autism or ADHD (mean age 9.28 ± 1.6; 81.1% males), (clinicaltrials.gov, NCT06303791). Participants were randomized to either the intervention group or the active control group (a structured, non-therapeutic intervention). Outcomes were collected at baseline (before randomization), at 12 weeks post-randomization, and at 6 months follow-up after randomization.

Results: A total of 82 participants were randomized in February 2024 (42 to the intervention group and 40 to the active control group). At post-intervention, participants in the intervention group scored statistically significantly better than those in the control group on measures of parenting stress (p < .01, ${\eta }_p^2$  = .29), coping skills (p < .01, ${\eta }_p^2$  = .24), and perceived social support (p = .025, ${\eta }_p^2$  = .10). Between-group comparisons also revealed statistically significant differences favoring the intervention group in child social functioning, executive functioning, and family dynamics. No statistically significant between-group differences were found for sleep problems or learning behavior. These between-group effects were maintained at the follow-up assessment.

Conclusion: The results of this study indicate that the INPSYD parenting program is effective for improving parenting stress, coping skills and children's executive functioning and social-behavioral outcomes in our sample.

Imposter participants are dishonest participants who fake their identities or exaggerate their experiences to participate in research. This appears to be a rising problem in quantitative and qualitative research as well as lived experience groups for child and adolescent mental health research. Imposters in research present great challenges for young people's safety, privacy, and well-being, and the data integrity of affected research studies. Although strategies have been suggested to identify and address this challenge, they come with limitations. Also, there are no evidence-based guidelines or frameworks about imposter data. We discuss key issues and considerations and propose actionable steps for researchers and practitioners working with young people. We also make a call for action for robust research to improve how we prevent, identify, and address imposters in child and adolescent mental health research.

This article highlights the importance of a multidisciplinary approach in understanding the environmental impacts on children's mental health, emphasizing the integration of longitudinal designs, genetic methodologies, and cross-cultural validation. Longitudinal research is essential to identify temporal relationships and sensitive developmental periods, while methods such as Mendelian randomization can help disentangle environmental effects from unmeasured genetic and social confounding factors. Cross-cultural validation is also crucial to ensure the global relevance of findings and to support equitable public health policies. This article advocates for more comprehensive research to better understand modifiable environmental factors that promote children's mental well-being.