4.1 Review

A systematic review of randomised controlled trials using psychological interventions for children and adolescents with medically unexplained symptoms: A focus on mental health outcomes

期刊

CLINICAL CHILD PSYCHOLOGY AND PSYCHIATRY
卷 25, 期 1, 页码 273-290

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/1359104519855415

关键词

Medically unexplained symptoms; paediatric; child; adolescent; mental health; systematic review

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Medically unexplained symptoms affect between 4% and 20% of children and adolescents; 30-60% of these children also experience mental health difficulties. Trials and reviews have focussed on physical gains in this population, often overlooking mental health outcomes. Objectives: To use a systematic review methodology guided by the PRISMA checklist to (1) investigate the effectiveness of psychological interventions for mental health difficulties in children and adolescents with medically unexplained symptoms and (2) identify aspects of interventions associated with their success. Methods: Randomised controlled studies investigating the impact of psychological interventions on mental health in children and adolescents with medically unexplained symptoms were included. Systematic searches of PsycINFO, MEDLINE and CINAHL were undertaken from inception to January 2018. Studies were appraised using the quality appraisal checklist. A qualitative synthesis of studies was completed. Results: In all, 18 studies were identified. Interventions targeting parental responses to illness and family communication appeared to have the best outcomes. Conclusions: Psychological interventions may be effective in improving mental health outcomes within this population; however, evidence for the efficacy of these interventions is limited due to a high risk of bias within the majority of reviewed studies. Future research using rigorous methodology and non-cognitive behavioural therapy interventions is recommended.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据