Gillham 2007.
| Methods | Design: RCT Conducted by the team who developed the intervention: yes |
|
| Participants | Description: universal Cut‐point for inclusion for indicated studies: N/A What risk was basis of inclusion for selected studies: N/A Diagnostic interview to exclude those with current or previous depression: those with current depression excluded. Unclear whether those with past depression were also excluded, however. Baseline severity of depression: CDI: 8.4 (subthreshold) Mean age: 12.1 Age range: 11 to 14 Percentage male: 54.1% Setting: school State what psychiatric diagnoses were excluded: exclusion criteria not specified Suicide risk excluded: exclusion criteria not specified Parents with history of schizophrenia/bipolar disorder excluded: exclusion criteria not specified Country: USA |
|
| Interventions | Broad category: CBT (for further information on intervention components, see Table 3) Manualised: yes Online: no Name of programme: Penn Resiliency Program Number of sessions: 12 sessions Length of sessions: 90 minutes Intensity (total number of hours): 18 hours Duration of treatment period: 12 weeks Group size: 6 to 14 Delivered by: all Fidelity: assessed as satisfactory to good Type of comparison: AP |
|
| Outcomes | Diagnosis: established from CDI of ≥ 13.0 or from clinically significant symptoms on the CDRS‐R of ≥ 65.0 Name of self‐report depression measure: CDI Name of clinician report depression measure: CDRS‐R Name of anxiety measure: N/A Name of general functioning measure: N/A Assessment points: post‐intervention, 12 months (medium‐term) and 36 months (long‐term) |
|
| Notes | Author contacted for methodological detail: no Author contacted for treatment manual: no (manual freely available on request) Author contacted for outcome data: no |
|
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | "... computer‐generated random numbers sequence" (p.10) |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | No information specified |
| Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) Subjects | Low risk | The nature of the trial suggests it is likely participants could have remained blind to the fact they were allocated to a placebo control group. However, without access to the participant information sheets and PLS, level of blinding cannot be ascertained. |
| Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) Assessors | Low risk | "Interviewers and coders were not informed of participants'... assignments" (p.13) |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Proportion of participants with incomplete post‐intervention self‐reported depression scores: 8.86% Means and SDs used in meta‐analysis based on what data: observed cases Intention‐to‐treat analyses: undertaken, but based on only those who completed baseline and at least one post‐intervention assessment |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | High risk | Protocol not available. However, CDRS‐R raw scores are not presented nor are the proportion of children with elevated, high, and clinically significant levels of depression. |
| Other bias | High risk | Trial conducted by those who developed the intervention |
| Implementation integrity | Low risk | Implementation integrity assessed: yes Implementation integrity adequate: described as "adequate to good" Implementation integrity reported: yes |