Background: Anxiety disorders in children and young people are common and bring significant personal and societal costs. Over the last two decades, there has been a substantial increase in research evaluating psychological and pharmacological treatments for anxiety disorders in children and young people and exciting and novel research has continued as the field strives to improve efficacy and effectiveness, and accessibility of interventions. This increase in research brings potential to draw together data across studies to compare treatment approaches and advance understanding of what works, how, and for whom. There are challenges to these efforts due largely to variation in studies' outcome measures and variation in the way study characteristics are reported, making it difficult to compare and/or combine studies, and this is likely to lead to faulty conclusions. Studies particularly vary in their reliance on child, parent, and/or assessor-based ratings across a range of outcomes, including remission of anxiety diagnosis, symptom reduction, and other domains of functioning (e.g., family relationships, peer relationships). Methods: To address these challenges, we convened a series of international activities that brought together the views of key stakeholders (i.e., researchers, mental health professionals, young people, parents/caregivers) to develop recommendations for outcome measurement to be used in treatment trials for anxiety disorders in children and young people. Results and Conclusions: This article reports the results of these activities and offers recommendations for selection and reporting of outcome measures to (a) guide future research and (b) improve communication of what has been measured and reported. We offer these recommendations to promote international consistency in trial reporting and to enable the field to take full advantage of the great opportunities that come from data sharing going forward.

A recent systematic review has reported that poor reading is reliably associated with anxiety. However, we currently lack evidence-based intervention for children who have both poor reading and anxiety (PRAX). In this study, we tested a new PRAX intervention in 8- to 12-year-old children using a double-baseline intervention case series design. Analyses of both group and individual data revealed that 12 weeks of PRAX intervention significantly improved children’s reading and spelling accuracy, and significantly reduced both anxiety disorders and symptoms. These results support PRAX intervention as a treatment for comorbid reading and anxiety problems in children and pave the way to a randomised controlled trial.

Facial expressions play a central role in diverse areas of psychology. However, facial stimuli are often only validated by adults, and there are no face databases validated by school-aged children. Validation by children is important because children still develop emotion recognition skills and may have different perceptions than adults. Therefore, in this study, we validated the adult Caucasian faces of the Radboud Faces Database (RaFD) in 8-to 12-year-old children (N = 652). Additionally, children rated valence, clarity, and model attractiveness. Emotion recognition rates were relatively high (72%; compared to 82% in the original validation by adults). Recognition accuracy was highest for happiness, below average for fear and disgust, and lowest for contempt. Children showed roughly the same emotion recognition pattern as adults, but were less accurate in distinguishing similar emotions. As expected, in general, 10-to 12-year-old children had a higher emotion recognition accuracy than 8-and 9-year-olds. Overall, girls slightly outperformed boys. More nuanced differences in these gender and age effects on recognition rates were visible per emotion. The current study provides researchers with recommendation on how to use the RaFD adult pictures in child studies. Researchers can select appropriate stimuli for their research using the online available validation data.