Background: Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) is first choice of treatment for depressive symptoms and disorders in adolescents, however improvements are necessary because overall efficacy is low. Insights on CBT components and contextual and structural characteristics might increase the efficacy. The aim of our approach is to evaluate the efficacy of CBT for youth with depression and investigate the influence of specific components, contextual and structural factors that could improve effects.Methods: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials was conducted, searches were undertaken in CINAHL, CENTRAL, EMBASE, MEDLINE/PubMed and PsycINFO. Outcomes were meta-analyzed and confidence in results was assessed using the GRADE-method. Meta-regression was used to pinpoint components or other factors that were associated with an in- or decrease of effects of CBT.Results: We included 31 trials with 4335 participants. Moderate-quality evidence was found for CBT reducing depressive symptoms at the end of treatment and at follow-up, and CBT as indicated prevention resulted in 63% less risk of being depressed at follow-up. CBT containing a combination of behavioral activation and challenging thoughts component (as part of cognitive restructuring) or the involvement of caregiver(s) in intervention were associated with better outcomes for youth on the long term.Conclusions: There is evidence that CBT is effective for youth with a (subclinical) depression. Our analyses show that effects might improve when CBT contains the components behavioral activation and challenging thoughts and also when the caregiver(s) are involved. However, the influential effects of these three moderators should be further tested in RCTs.

Background: Anxiety and depressive disorders are prevalent in adolescents and young adults. However, most young people with mental health problems do not receive treatment. Computerized cognitive behavior therapy (cCBT) may provide an accessible alternative to face-to-face treatment, but the evidence base in young people is limited.Objective: The objective was to perform an up-to-date comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of cCBT in treating anxiety and depression in adolescents and young adults compared with active treatment and passive controls. We aimed to examine posttreatment and follow-up effects and explore the moderators of treatment effects.Methods: We conducted systematic searches in the following six electronic databases: PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We included randomized controlled trials comparing cCBT with any control group in adolescents or young adults (age 12-25 years) with anxiety or depressive symptoms. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials, version 2.0. Overall quality of evidence for each outcome was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Posttreatment means and SDs were compared between intervention and control groups, and pooled effect sizes (Hedges g) were calculated. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression analyses were conducted to explore whether age, guidance level, and adherence rate were associated with treatment outcome.Results: The search identified 7670 papers, of which 24 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most included studies (22/24) had a high risk of bias owing to self-report measures and/or inappropriate handling of missing data. Compared with passive controls, cCBT yielded small to medium posttreatment pooled effect sizes regarding depressive symptoms (g=0.51, 95% CI 0.30-0.72, number needed to treat [NNT]=3.55) and anxiety symptoms (g=0.44, 95% CI 0.23-0.65, NNT=4.10). cCBT yielded effects similar to those of active treatment controls regarding anxiety symptoms (g=0.04, 95% CI −0.23 to 0.31). For depressive symptoms, the nonsignificant pooled effect size favored active treatment controls (g=−0.70, 95% CI −1.51 to 0.11, P=.09), but heterogeneity was very high (I2=90.63%). No moderators of treatment effects were identified. At long-term follow-up, cCBT yielded a small pooled effect size regarding depressive symptoms compared with passive controls (g=0.27, 95% CI 0.09-0.45, NNT=6.58). No other follow-up effects were found; however, power was limited owing to the small number of studies.Conclusions: cCBT is beneficial for reducing posttreatment anxiety and depressive symptoms in adolescents and young adults compared with passive controls. Compared with active treatment controls, cCBT yielded similar effects regarding anxiety symptoms. Regarding depressive symptoms, however, the results remain unclear. More high-quality research involving active controls and long-term follow-up assessments is needed in this population.Trial Registration: PROSPERO CRD42019119725; https://tinyurl.com/y5acfgd9.

Depression during adolescence is a serious mental health problem. Difficulties in regulating evoked emotions after stressful life events are considered to lead to depression. This study examined if depressive symptoms were mediated by various cognitive emotion regulation strategies after stressful life events, more specifically, the loss of a loved one, health threats or relational challenges. We used a sample of 398 adolescents (M_age = 16.94, SD = 2.90), including 52 depressed outpatients, who all reported stressful life event(s). Path analyses in Mplus were used to test mediation, for the whole sample as well as separately for participants scoring high versus low on depression, using multigroup analyses. Health threats and relational challenging stressful life events were associated with depressive symptoms, while loss was not. More frequent use of maladaptive strategies was related to more depressive symptoms. More frequent use of adaptive strategies was related to less depressive symptoms. Specific life events were associated with specific emotion regulation strategies. The relationship between challenging, stressful life events and depressive symptoms in the whole group was mediated by maladaptive strategies (self-blame, catastrophizing and rumination). No mediation effect was found for adaptive strategies. The association between relational challenging, stressful life events and depressive symptoms was mediated by maladaptive, cognitive emotion regulation strategies.

Meta-analyses show that psychotherapies are effective in the treatment of depression in children and adolescents. However, these effects are usually reported in terms of effect sizes. For patients and clinicians, it is important to know whether patients achieve a clinically significant improvement or deterioration. We conducted such a meta-analysis to examine response, clinically significant change, clinically significant deterioration and recovery as outcomes. We searched four bibliographic databases and included 40 randomised trials comparing psychotherapy for youth depression against control conditions. We used a validated method to estimate outcome rates, based on means, standard deviation and N at baseline and post-test. We also calculated numbers-need-to- treat (NNT). The overall response rate in psychotherapies at 2 (±1) months after baseline was 39% (95% CI: 34–45) and 24% (95% CI: 0.19–28) in control conditions (NNT: 6.2). The difference between therapy and control was still significant at 6–12 months after baseline (NNT=7.8). Clinically significant improvement was found in 54% of youth in therapy, compared with 32% in control groups (NNT=5.3); clinically significant deterioration was 6% in therapy, 13% in controls (NNT=5.1); recovery was 58% in therapy, 36% in controls (NNT=3.3). Smaller effects were found in studies with low risk of bias. Psychotherapies for depression in youth are effective compared to control conditions, but more than 60% of youth receiving therapy do not respond. More effective treatments and treatment strategies are clearly needed. Trial registrationhttps://osf.io/84xka

The death of a parent or sibling (family bereavement) is associated with mental health problems in approximately, 25 % of the affected children. However, it is still unknown whether mental health problems of family-bereaved adolescents are predicted by pre-existing mental health problems, pre-loss family functioning, or multiple bereavements. In this study, a prospective longitudinal assessment of change in mental health following bereavement was done in a large representative sample from the ‘Tracking Adolescents Individual Lives Survey’ (TRAILS). This is a four-wave prospective cohort study of Dutch adolescents (n = 2230) of whom 131 (5.9 %) had experienced family bereavement at the last wave (T4). Family-bereaved adolescents reported more internalizing problems, within 2 years after family bereavement, compared to the non-bereaved peers, while taking into account the level of internalizing problems before the bereavement. A clinically relevant finding was that 22 % new cases were found in family-bereaved, in comparison to 5.5 % new cases in non-bereaved. Low SES predicted more internalizing problems in family-bereaved but not in non-bereaved adolescents. Family functioning, reported by the adolescent, did not predict mental health problems within 2 years. Multiple family bereavements predicted fewer externalizing problems. In conclusion, internalizing problems increase in adolescents after family bereavement in comparison to non-bereaved and these can be predicted by pre-loss factors. Awareness among professionals regarding the risks for aggravation of mental health problems after family loss is needed.