Mendelson 2010.
| Methods | Design: cluster‐RCT Conducted by the team who developed the intervention: no |
|
| Participants | Description: targeted Cut‐point for inclusion for indicated studies: N/A What risk was basis of inclusion for selected studies: those living in disadvantaged and/or underserved urban communities Diagnostic interview to exclude those with current or previous depression: not undertaken Baseline severity of depression: SMFQ: score not specified Mean age: 10.1 Age range: 9 to 11 Percentage male: 39.2% 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: third wave (for further information on intervention components, see Table 3) Manualised: yes Online: no Name of programme: none specified Number of sessions: 48 sessions Length of sessions: 45 minutes Intensity (total number of hours): 36 hours Duration of treatment period: 12 weeks Group size: 25 Delivered by: non‐mental health experts Fidelity: not assessed Type of comparison: WL |
|
| Outcomes | Diagnosis: N/A Name of self‐report depression measure: SMFQ Name of clinical report depression measure: N/A Name of anxiety measure: N/A Name of general functioning measure: N/A Assessment points: post‐intervention |
|
| Notes | Author contacted for methodological detail: no Author contacted for treatment manual: yes (not provided) Author contacted for outcome data: no |
|
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | No information specified |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | No information specified |
| Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) Subjects | High risk | The nature of the trial suggests it is unlikely participants could have remained blind to the fact they were allocated to wait‐list 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 | Unclear risk | All outcomes self‐reported. Assessor blinding therefore not applicable. |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | High risk | Proportion of participants with incomplete post‐intervention self‐reported depression scores: 11.4% Means and SDs used in meta‐analysis based on what data: observed cases Intention‐to‐treat analyses: not undertaken |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Protocol not available |
| Other bias | Unclear risk | No information specified |
| Implementation integrity | Unclear risk | Implementation integrity assessed: unclear if assessed Implementation integrity adequate: N/A Implementation integrity reported: N/A |