BackgroundSystematic reviews suggest school-based mindfulness training (SBMT) shows promise in promoting student mental health.ObjectiveThe My Resilience in Adolescence (MYRIAD) Trial evaluated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of SBMT compared with teaching-as-usual (TAU).MethodsMYRIAD was a parallel group, cluster-randomised controlled trial. Eighty-five eligible schools consented and were randomised 1:1 to TAU (43 schools, 4232 students) or SBMT (42 schools, 4144 students), stratified by school size, quality, type, deprivation and region. Schools and students (mean (SD); age range=12.2 (0.6); 11–14 years) were broadly UK population-representative. Forty-three schools (n=3678 pupils; 86.9%) delivering SBMT, and 41 schools (n=3572; 86.2%) delivering TAU, provided primary end-point data. SBMT comprised 10 lessons of psychoeducation and mindfulness practices. TAU comprised standard social-emotional teaching. Participant-level risk for depression, social-emotional-behavioural functioning and well-being at 1 year follow-up were the co-primary outcomes. Secondary and economic outcomes were included.FindingsAnalysis of 84 schools (n=8376 participants) found no evidence that SBMT was superior to TAU at 1 year. Standardised mean differences (intervention minus control) were: 0.005 (95% CI −0.05 to 0.06) for risk for depression; 0.02 (−0.02 to 0.07) for social-emotional-behavioural functioning; and 0.02 (−0.03 to 0.07) for well-being. SBMT had a high probability of cost-effectiveness (83%) at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20 000 per quality-adjusted life year. No intervention-related adverse events were observed.ConclusionsFindings do not support the superiority of SBMT over TAU in promoting mental health in adolescence.Clinical implicationsThere is need to ask what works, for whom and how, as well as considering key contextual and implementation factors.Trial registrationCurrent controlled trials ISRCTN86619085. This research was funded by the Wellcome Trust (WT104908/Z/14/Z and WT107496/Z/15/Z).
BackgroundPreventing mental health problems in early adolescence is a priority. School-based mindfulness training (SBMT) is an approach with mixed evidence.ObjectivesTo explore for whom SBMT does/does not work and what influences outcomes.MethodsThe My Resilience in Adolescence was a parallel-group, cluster randomised controlled trial (K=84 secondary schools; n=8376 students, age: 11–13) recruiting schools that provided standard social–emotional learning. Schools were randomised 1:1 to continue this provision (control/teaching as usual (TAU)), and/or to offer SBMT (‘.b’ (intervention)). Risk of depression, social–emotional–behavioural functioning and well-being were measured at baseline, preintervention, post intervention and 1 year follow-up. Hypothesised moderators, implementation factors and mediators were analysed using mixed effects linear regressions, instrumental variable methods and path analysis.FindingsSBMT versus TAU resulted in worse scores on risk of depression and well-being in students at risk of mental health problems both at post intervention and 1-year follow-up, but differences were small and not clinically relevant. Higher dose and reach were associated with worse social–emotional–behavioural functioning at postintervention. No implementation factors were associated with outcomes at 1-year follow-up. Pregains−postgains in mindfulness skills and executive function predicted better outcomes at 1-year follow-up, but the SBMT was unsuccessful to teach these skills with clinical relevance.SBMT as delivered in this trial is not indicated as a universal intervention. Moreover, it may be contraindicated for students with existing/emerging mental health symptoms.Clinical implicationsUniversal SBMT is not recommended in this format in early adolescence. Future research should explore social−emotional learning programmes adapted to the unique needs of young people.
Background Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterised by hyperactivity, inattention and impulsivity. Up to two thirds of young people with ADHD may experience symptoms into adulthood, yet the limited literature available suggests that many young people with ongoing needs do not transfer from child to adult healthcare services. Although worldwide and NICE guidelines recognise the importance of supported transition, evidence suggests for ADHD that this is poorly managed and variable. Little is known about how transition is experienced by those involved. We aimed to synthesise existing peer‐reviewed literature to understand views and experiences of young people, carers and clinicians on transitioning between child and adult ADHD services. Method Five databases were searched and all articles published between 2000 and up until January 2017 considered. Four key search areas were targeted; ADHD, Transition, Age and Qualitative Research. Quality appraisal was conducted using Wallace criteria. Findings from included studies were synthesised using thematic analysis. Results Eight papers, six from the UK and one each from Hong Kong and Italy, were included. Emerging themes centred on difficulties transitioning; hurdles that had to be negotiated, limitations of adult mental health services, inadequate care and the impact of transition difficulties. Conclusions Healthcare transition for this group is difficult in the United Kingdom because of multiple challenges in service provision. In addition to recommendations in NICE guidelines, respondents identified a need for better provision of information to young people about adult services and what to expect, greater flexibility around age boundaries and the value of support from specialist adult ADHD services. More research is needed into ADHD healthcare transition experiences, especially in countries outside the United Kingdom, including accounts from carers and clinicians.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.