Children of parents with a history of depression have an increased risk of developing depression themselves. The present study investigated the role of interpretation biases (that have been found in adults and adolescents with depression but have rarely been examined in at-risk youth) in the transgenerational transmission of depression risk. Interpretation biases were assessed with two experimental tasks: Ambiguous Scenarios Task (AST) and Scrambled Sentences Task (SST) in 9 -14-year-old children of parents with a history of depression (high risk; n ϭ 43) in comparison to children of parents with no history of mental disorders (low risk; n ϭ 35). Interpretation biases were also compared between the two groups of parents and relationships between children's and parents' bias scores were examined. As expected, we found more negative interpretation biases in high-risk children compared to low-risk children as well as in parents with a history of depression compared to never-depressed parents (assessed via the SST but not the AST). However, transgenerational correlations were only found for the AST. Our results indicate that negative interpretation biases are present in youth at risk for depression, possibly representing a cognitive vulnerability for the development of depression. Moreover, different measures of interpretation bias seemed to capture different aspects of biased processing with the more implicit measure (SST) being a more valid indicator of depressive processing.

Objective Parental depression is one of the biggest risk factors for youth depression. This parallel randomized controlled trial evaluates the effectiveness of the German version of the family-group-cognitive-behavioral (FGCB) preventive intervention for children of depressed parents. Methods Families with (i) a parent who has experienced depression and (ii) a healthy child aged 8–17 years (mean = 11.63; 53% female) were randomly allocated (blockwise; stratified by child age and parental depression) to the 12-session intervention (EG; n = 50) or no intervention (CG; usual care; n = 50). Self-reported (unblinded) outcomes were assessed immediately after the intervention (6 months). We hypothesized that CG children would show a greater increase in self-reported symptoms of depression (DIKJ) and internalising/externalising disorder (YSR/CBCL) over time compared to the EG. Intervention effects on secondary outcome variables emotion regulation (FEEL-KJ), attributional style (ASF-KJ), knowledge of depression and parenting style (ESI) were also expected. Study protocol (Belinda Platt, Pietsch, Krick, Oort, & Schulte-Körne, 2014) and trial registration (NCT02115880) reported elsewhere. Results We found significant intervention effects on self-reported internalising ($$\eta_{p}^{2}$$ η p 2  = 0.05) and externalising ($$\eta_{p}^{2}$$ η p 2  = 0.08) symptoms but did not detect depressive symptoms or parent-reported psychopathology. Parental depression severity did not modify these effects. Both groups showed equally improved knowledge of depression ($$\eta_{p}^{2}$$ η p 2  = 0.06). There were no intervention effects on emotion regulation, attributional style or parenting style. Conclusion The German version of the FGCB intervention is effective in reducing symptoms of general psychopathology. There was no evidence that the mechanisms targeted in the intervention changed within the intervention period.

Background Promoting well-being and preventing poor mental health in young people is a major global priority. Building emotional competence (EC) skills via a mobile app may be an effective, scalable and acceptable way to do this. However, few large-scale controlled trials have examined the efficacy of mobile apps in promoting mental health in young people; none have tailored the app to individual profiles. Method/design The Emotional Competence for Well-Being in Young Adults cohort multiple randomised controlled trial (cmRCT) involves a longitudinal prospective cohort to examine well-being, mental health and EC in 16–22 year olds across 12 months. Within the cohort, eligible participants are entered to either the PREVENT trial (if selected EC scores at baseline within worst-performing quartile) or to the PROMOTE trial (if selected EC scores not within worst-performing quartile). In both trials, participants are randomised (i) to continue with usual practice, repeated assessments and a self-monitoring app; (ii) to additionally receive generic cognitive-behavioural therapy self-help in app; (iii) to additionally receive personalised EC self-help in app. In total, 2142 participants aged 16 to 22 years, with no current or past history of major depression, bipolar disorder or psychosis will be recruited across UK, Germany, Spain, and Belgium. Assessments take place at baseline (pre-randomisation), 1, 3 and 12 months post-randomisation. Primary endpoint and outcome for PREVENT is level of depression symptoms on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 at 3 months; primary endpoint and outcome for PROMOTE is emotional well-being assessed on the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale at 3 months. Depressive symptoms, anxiety, well-being, health-related quality of life, functioning and cost-effectiveness are secondary outcomes. Compliance, adverse events and potentially mediating variables will be carefully monitored. Conclusions The trial aims to provide a better understanding of the causal role of learning EC skills using interventions delivered via mobile phone apps with respect to promoting well-being and preventing poor mental health in young people. This knowledge will be used to develop and disseminate innovative evidence-based, feasible, and effective Mobile-health public health strategies for preventing poor mental health and promoting well-being. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.org). Number of identification: NCT04148508 November 2019.

Feasible interventions addressing unhealthy changes in energy balance-related behavior (EBRB) during pregnancy and early postpartum are needed. This study identified the needs and wishes of expecting and first-time parents concerning EBRB interventions during the transition to parenthood. Thirteen focus group discussions (n = 74) were conducted. Couples provided information about whether an intervention targeting unhealthy EBRB changes during pregnancy and postpartum would be acceptable, how such an intervention should look like, and in which way and during which period they needed support. Guided by the TiDIER checklist, all quotes were divided into five main categories (i.e., ‘what’, ‘how’, ‘when and how much’, ‘where’, ‘for and from whom’). Interventions should aim for changes at the individual, social, environmental and policy levels. The accessibility and approach (indirect or face-to-face) together with communicational aspects should be taken into account. A focus should go to delivering reliable and personalized information and improving self-regulation skills. Interventions should be couple- or family-based. Authorities, healthcare professionals, the partner and peers are important sources for intervention delivery and support. In the prevention of unhealthy EBRB changes around childbirth, the involvement of both parents is needed, while health care professionals play an important role in providing personalized advice.