No abstract

Background: A majority of youth with depression and related difficulties never access treatment. Barriers such as stigma, financial costs, and provider shortages contribute to this problem. Single session interventions (SSIs) have been found to benefit youth and help reduce depression symptoms. Since many SSIs are brief and can be accessed online, they may circumvent traditional barriers to accessing treatment, thus supporting wellbeing in individuals otherwise unable to access care. SSIs may be particularly beneficial for LGBTQ+ youth, for whom barriers to treatment are often exacerbated. There is a need to determine whether LGBTQ+ youth respond as positively to SSIs as non-LGBTQ+ youth, or if adaptations are needed prior to widespread dissemination. Methods: We investigated whether changes in helplessness, agency, and self-hate from before to after completing online SSIs differed as a function of LGBTQ+ identity in a sample of 258 youths (N=258, 81.4% female assigned sex, 60.5% LGBTQ+, 47.3% BIPOC). We also quantitatively and qualitatively compared intervention acceptability ratings and feedback across LGBTQ+ and non-LGBTQ+ youths. Results: Analyses revealed no significant differences between cisgender LGBQ+, trans and gender diverse, and cisgender heterosexual youths for any intervention outcomes. Likewise, no group differences emerged in intervention acceptability ratings or written program feedback. Limitations: Self-selection bias and underrepresentation of certain populations, such as American Indian and Alaskan Native youths, may limit generalizability of results.Conclusions: Results suggest that online mental health SSIs are equally acceptable and useful to LGBTQ+ and non-LGBTQ+ youth alike, even without culturally specific tailoring.

Youth loneliness is a risk factor for myriad adverse psychosocial outcomes, making it a potentially informative construct for assessment and treatment research. Minority stressors may place LGBTQ+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer) youths at high risk of loneliness. However, the prevalence of loneliness across gender and sexual identities cannot be precisely estimated or compared without establishing that common measures assess the construct equivalently across groups. In a preregistered study, we determined the optimal structure of the UCLA Loneliness Scale and investigated whether it showed invariance across gender and sexual identities in a national U.S. sample of adolescents with elevated depressive symptoms ( N = 2,431; https://osf.io/52ctd ). Results supported strict invariance, indicating that loneliness scores can be meaningfully compared across groups in this sample. Exploratory analyses indicated that loneliness levels and LGBTQ+ identity predicted levels of depression and anxiety. We discuss implications for research on loneliness, health disparities, and psychopathology in high-symptom youths.

Emerging evidence suggests that the effects of the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic have disproportionately impacted minoritized populations, including rising rates of hate crimes directed at Asian Americans. Asian and White students (N = 1,261) at a large public university completed a survey of their experiences during the first month of the COVID-19 pandemic. Measures included anxiety, depression, academic engagement, and experienced discrimination. Using structural equation modeling, we found that Asian participants reported experiencing higher discrimination during the first month of the pandemic (e.g., being treated as if you have a disease) compared to White participants. Experienced discrimination was associated with significantly higher levels of depression and anxiety and significantly lower levels of academic engagement. In addition to the physical and economic toll of the COVID-19 pandemic, racism and discrimination may pose unique challenges for Asian Americans in particular.

No abstract