Adolescence is a period of elevated stress sensitivity, which places adolescents at increased risk of developing mental health problems such as burnout, depression, anxiety, and externalizing problems. Early intervention of psychological needs and low-threshold care addressing such needs may prevent this dysfunctional development. Schools may provide an important environment to identify and address psychological needs. The aim of this protocol is to describe the design of a study aiming to evaluate the effectiveness of low-threshold school-based skills-training programs promoting the mental health of adolescents and to examine moderators of the effectiveness. A Randomized Controlled Trial will be conducted to examine the effectiveness of two school-based skills-training programs aiming to promote mental health by improving either skills to deal with performance anxiety or social skills. A multi-informant (i.e., students, parents, and trainers) and multi-method (i.e., questionnaires and physiological measurements) approach will be used to assess program targets (skills to deal with performance anxiety or social skills), direct program outcomes (performance or social anxiety) and mental health outcomes (i.e., stress, internalizing and externalizing problems, self-esteem and well-being), as well as specific moderators (i.e., student, parent and program characteristics, social support, perfectionism, stressful life events, perceived parental pressure, positive parenting behavior, treatment alliance and program integrity). The current study will provide information on the effectiveness of school-based skills-training programs. It is of crucial importance that the school environment can provide students with effective, low-threshold intervention programs to promote adolescents’ daily functioning and well-being and prevent the emergence of mental health problems that negatively affect school performance. Dutch Trial Register number NL7438 . Registered 12 December 2018.

Background: The Covid-19 pandemic may have had negative effects on youth and parental mental health, especially in high-risk populations such as multi-problem families (i.e., families that experience problems in multiple domains, such as mental health and social network problems). Using one to four assessments during all phases of the Covid-19 pandemic up until January 2022, we examined the associations between pandemic-related stress and mental health (resilience and well-being) of youth and parents from multi-problem families. We also investigated whether experienced informal (i.e., youth informal mentoring) and formal support (i.e., therapist support) served as protective factors in this association. Methods: A total of 92 youth aged 10–19 years (46.7% girls; mean age 16.00 years) and 78 parents (79.5% female; mean age 47.17 years) filled in one to four questionnaires between March 2020 and January 2022. Multi-level analyses were conducted to account for the nested structure of the data. Results: For youth, pandemic-related stress was associated with lower well-being, but not with resilience. Perceived support from both mentors and therapists was positively associated with youth mental health. Furthermore, high perceived therapist support protected youth from the negative effect of pandemic-related stress on resilience. For parents, pandemic-related stress was not related to mental health, irrespective of therapist support. Yet, therapist support was directly and positively associated with parental mental health. Conclusions: Youth from multi-problem families who experience pandemic-related stress are at risk of (elevated) mental health problems during the pandemic, specifically if they have no or weak therapist support. The mental health of parents, however, was minimally affected by pandemic-related stress, indicating strength and flexibility. Youth and parents who experienced support during the pandemic reported higher levels of resilience and well-being, demonstrating the importance of support for individuals’ mental health during stressful times such as a pandemic.

This study aimed to examine the short- and long term (cost-) effectiveness of Family Group Conferencing (FGC) compared to care as usual (CAU) in terms of improved child safety, empowerment and social support. A subgroup of a larger randomized controlled trial, comprising 69 families in child welfare (experimental group: n = 46; control group: n = 23), was included. No additional effects of FGC on child safety, social support and only short-term positive effects on empowerment were found. There were no differences in costs between FGC and CAU. The chance for FGC to be cost-effective was small. For families who refused FGC, the FGC approach was more cost-effective than CAU, whereas it was less cost-effective for families that prepared or completed FGC. Overall, FGC is not (cost-)effective in improving child safety, empowerment and social support, but cost-effectiveness varies at different levels of FGC-completion. Dutch Trial Register number NTR4320 . Registered 17 December 2013.