Julia Dray

Dr. Julia Dray

School of Clinical and Health Sciences, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

13Years (2014-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 October 2017 in Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
Julia DrayJulia Dray
Julia Dray
JBJenny Bowman
Jenny Bowman
ECElizabeth Campbell
Elizabeth Campbell
MFMegan Freund
Megan Freund
LWLuke Wolfenden
Luke Wolfenden
JWJohn Wiggers
John Wiggers
To examine the effect of universal, school-based, resilience-focused interventions on mental health problems in children and adolescents. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of universal, school-based interventions that included strategies to strengthen a minimum of 3 internal resilience protective factors, and included an outcome measure of mental health problems in children and adolescents aged 5 to 18 years. Six databases were searched from 1995 to 2015. Results were pooled in meta-analyses by mental health outcome (anxiety symptoms, depressive symptoms, hyperactivity, conduct problems, internalizing problems, externalizing problems, and general psychological distress), for all trials (5-18 years). Subgroup analyses were conducted by age (child: 5-10 years; adolescent: 11-18 years), length of follow-up (short: post-≤12 months; long: >12 months), and gender (narrative). A total of 57 included trials were identified from 5,984 records, with 49 contributing to meta-analyses. For all trials, resilience-focused interventions were effective relative to a control in reducing 4 of 7 outcomes: depressive symptoms, internalizing problems, externalizing problems, and general psychological distress. For child trials (meta-analyses for 6 outcomes), interventions were effective for anxiety symptoms and general psychological distress. For adolescent trials (meta-analyses for 5 outcomes), interventions were effective for internalizing problems. For short-term follow-up, interventions were effective for 2 of 7 outcomes: depressive symptoms and anxiety symptoms. For long-term follow-up (meta-analyses for 5 outcomes), interventions were effective for internalizing problems. The findings may suggest most promise for using universal resilience-focused interventions at least for short-term reductions in depressive and anxiety symptoms for children and adolescents, particularly if a cognitive-behavioral therapy-based approach is used. The limited number of trials providing data amenable for meta-analysis for some outcomes and subgroups, the variability of interventions, study quality, and bias mean that it is not possible to draw more specific conclusions. Identifying what intervention qualities (such as number and type of protective factor) achieve the greatest positive effect per mental health problem outcome remains an important area for future research. Systematic Review of Universal Resilience Interventions Targeting Child and Adolescent Mental Health in the School Setting; http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-015-0172-6; PROSPERO CRD42015025908.


3 April 2017 in Journal of Adolescence
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
Julia DrayJulia Dray
Julia Dray
JBJenny Bowman
Jenny Bowman
ECElizabeth Campbell
Elizabeth Campbell
MFMegan Freund
Megan Freund
RHRebecca Hodder
Rebecca Hodder
JWJohn Wiggers
John Wiggers
Worldwide, 10–20% of adolescents experience mental health problems. Strategies aimed at strengthening resilience protective factors provide a potential approach for reducing mental health problems in adolescents. This study evaluated the effectiveness of a universal, school‐based intervention targeting resilience protective factors in reducing mental health problems in adolescents. A cluster randomised controlled trial was conducted in 20 intervention and 12 control secondary schools located in socio‐economically disadvantaged areas of NSW, Australia. Data were collected from 3115 students at baseline (Grade 7, 2011), of whom 2149 provided data at follow up (Grade 10, 2014; enrolments in Grades 7 to 10 typically aged 12–16 years; 50% male; 69.0% retention). There were no significant differences between groups at follow‐up for three mental health outcomes: total SDQ, internalising problems, and prosocial behaviour. A small statistically significant difference in favour of the control group was found for externalising problems. Findings highlight the continued difficulties in developing effective, school‐based prevention programs for mental health problems in adolescents.Trial registration: ANZCTR (Ref no: ACTRN12611000606987).

9 September 2022 in Systematic Reviews
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TBTegan Bradley
Tegan Bradley
ECElizabeth Campbell
Elizabeth Campbell
Julia DrayJulia Dray
Julia Dray
KBKate Bartlem
Kate Bartlem
PWPaula Wye
Paula Wye
JBJenny Bowman
Jenny Bowman
Background: People with a mental health condition experience an elevated risk of chronic disease and greater prevalence of health and behaviours. Lifestyle interventions aim to reduce this risk by modifying health behaviours such as physical activity and diet. Previous reviews exploring the efficacy of such interventions for this group have typically limited inclusion to individuals with severe mental illness (SMI), with a focus of impact on weight. This review assessed the efficacy of lifestyle interventions delivered in community or outpatient settings to people with any mental health condition, on weight, physical activity and diet. Methods: Eligible studies were randomised or cluster-randomised controlled trials published between January 1999 and February 2019 aiming to improve weight, physical activity or diet, for people with any mental health condition. Two reviewers independently completed study screening, data extraction and assessment of methodological quality. Primary outcome measures were weight, physical activity and diet. Secondary outcome measures were body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, sedentary behaviour and mental health. Where possible, meta-analyses were conducted. Narrative synthesis using vote counting based on direction of effect was used where studies were not amenable to meta-analysis. Results: Fifty-seven studies were included (49 SMI only), with 46 contributing to meta-analyses. Meta-analyses revealed significant (< 0.05) effect of interventions on mean weight loss (−1.42 kg), achieving 5% weight loss (OR 2.48), weight maintenance (−2.05 kg), physical activity (IPAQ MET minutes: 226.82) and daily vegetable serves (0.51), but not on fruit serves (0.01). Significant effects were also seen for secondary outcomes of BMI (−0.48 units) and waist circumference (−0.87cm), but not mental health (depression: SMD −0.03; anxiety: SMD −0.49; severity of psychological symptoms: SMD 0.72). Studies reporting sedentary behaviour were not able to be meta-analysed. Most trials had high risk of bias, quality of evidence for weight and physical activity were moderate, while quality of evidence for diet was low. Conclusion: Lifestyle interventions delivered to people with a mental health condition made statistically significant improvements to weight, BMI, waist circumference, vegetable serves and physical activity. Further high-quality trials with greater consistency in measurement and reporting of outcomes are needed to better understand the impact of lifestyle interventions on physical activity, diet, sedentary behaviour and mental health and to understand impact on subgroups. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42019137197

29 December 2015 in Systematic Reviews
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Julia DrayJulia Dray
Julia Dray
JBJenny Bowman
Jenny Bowman
LWLuke Wolfenden
Luke Wolfenden
ECElizabeth Campbell
Elizabeth Campbell
MFMegan Freund
Megan Freund
JWJohn Wiggers
John Wiggers
The mental health of children and adolescents is a key area of health concern internationally. Previous empirical studies suggest that resilience may act as a protective mechanism towards the development of mental health problems. Resilience refers to the ability to employ a collection of protective factors to return to or maintain positive mental health following disadvantage or adversity. Schools represent a potential setting within which protective factors of all children and adolescents may be fostered through resilience-focussed interventions. Despite this potential, limited research has investigated the effectiveness of universal school-based resilience-focussed interventions on mental health outcomes in children and adolescents. The objective of the present review is to assess the effects of universal school-based resilience-focussed interventions, relative to a comparison group, on mental health outcomes in children and adolescents. Eligible studies will be randomised (including cluster-randomised) controlled trials of universal interventions explicitly described as resilience-focussed or comprising strategies to strengthen a minimum of three internal protective factors, targeting children aged 5 to 18 years, implemented within schools, and reporting a mental health outcome. Screening for studies will be conducted across six electronic databases: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), Excerpta Medica database (EMBASE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Two reviewers will retrieve eligible articles, assess risk of bias, and extract data. Where studies are sufficiently homogenous and reported outcomes are amenable for pooled synthesis, meta-analysis will be performed. Narrative description will be used to synthesise trial outcome data where data cannot be combined or heterogeneity exists. This review will aid in building an evidence base for the effectiveness of universal school-based resilience-focussed interventions and in doing so provide an opportunity to better inform the development of interventions to potentially prevent mental health problems in child and adolescent populations. PROSPERO CRD42015025908

18 July 2014 in Trials
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Julia DrayJulia Dray
Julia Dray
JBJenny Bowman
Jenny Bowman
MFMegan Freund
Megan Freund
ECElizabeth Campbell
Elizabeth Campbell
LWLuke Wolfenden
Luke Wolfenden
JWJohn Wiggers
John Wiggers
Research investigating the effectiveness of universal interventions to reduce the risk of mental health problems remains limited. Schools are a promising setting within which adolescents can receive interventions aimed at promoting their mental health. The aim of this study is to assess the effectiveness of a resilience-based prevention-focused intervention in reducing the risk of mental health problems among adolescents attending secondary school in socio-economically disadvantaged areas. A cluster randomised control trial will be conducted, with schools as the unit of randomisation. Initially, 32 secondary schools will be randomly allocated to a control or intervention group (12 control and 20 intervention). An intervention focused on improving student internal and external resilience factors will be implemented in intervention schools. A survey of students in Grade 7 in both intervention and control schools will be conducted (baseline) and repeated three years later when the students are in Grade 10. The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire will be used to measure the risk of mental health problems. At follow-up, the risk of mental health problems will be compared between Grade 10 students in intervention and control schools to determine intervention effectiveness. The study presents an opportunity to determine the effectiveness of a comprehensive resilience-based intervention in reducing the risk of mental health problems in adolescents attending secondary schools. The outcomes of the trial are of importance to youth, schools, mental health clinicians and policymakers. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12611000606987 , registered 14 June 2011.