Table 2.
Summary of characteristics of studies included in the systematic review and the meta-analyses
| Trial | Children selection | Selected by | Design | Control condition | Teachers Number I C | Teaching experience mean I C | Female percentage | Students Number I C | Age range in years | Percentage of boys |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baker-Henningham et al. (2009a, 2009b) | Children were selected using Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) | Teachers | Four-arm RCT | AT | 15 | 14 | N/A | 69 | 3–5 | 65.15% |
| 12 | 12 | 66 | ||||||||
| Baker-Henningham et al. (2012), Baker-Henningham and Walker, (2018) | Children were selected using ICD-10 Diagnostic criteria for research on conduct disorder | Interview with the classroom teacher using questionnaire | Four-arm RCT | TAU | 37 | 12 | 94.55% | 113 | 3–6 | 61.35% |
| 36 | 13 | 112 | ||||||||
| Bloomquist et al. (1991) | A screening method is known as multistage identification, to diagnose ADHD | Teachers | Three-arm RCT | WLC/AT | N/A | N/A | N/A | 16 | 6–6 | 69.00% |
| 16 | ||||||||||
| Caldarella et al. (2018) | Children at risk of behavioral problems were selected using SSBD | Teachers | Two-arm RCT | TAU | 160* | 9 | 95.00% | 177 | 6–12 | 50.00% |
| 9 | 134 | |||||||||
| Conroy et al. (2015) | Children were selected if they are at risk of emotional behavioral problems EBD using Early Screening Project (ESP) | Teachers | Two-arm RCT | TAU | 26 | 15 | 100.00% | 66 | 3–5 | 63.75% |
| 27 | 13 | 64 | ||||||||
| Conroy et al. (2021) | Children were identified at risk for an (ESP) | Teachers | Two-arm RCT | AT | 10 | 6 | 95.00% | 18 | 3–5 | 50.97% |
| 12 | 18 | 21 | ||||||||
| Corkum et al. (2019) | Students were previously diagnosed with ADHD | physician, psychologist | Two-arm RCT | WLC | 28 | 12 | 91.40% | 28 | 6–12 | 88.05% |
| 30 | 15 | 30 | ||||||||
| Downer et al. (2018) | The top two boys and one girl who scored high on ADHD and ODD rating by ADHD and ODD Rating Scale DuPaul | Teachers | two-arm RCT | TAU | 22 | 19 | 100.00% | 66 | 2.5–5.5 | 65.00% |
| 22 | 19 | 66 | ||||||||
| Gonzales-Ball & Bratton, (2019) | Children who exhibiting disruptive behavior were chosen | Teachers | Two-arm RCT | AC | 11 | 7 | 85.00% | 11 | 3–4 | 74.20% |
| 12 | 7 | 9 | ||||||||
| Hickey et al. (2017) | Students who scored above the cutoff > 12 SDQ | Teachers | Three-arm RCT | WLC | 11 | 9 | 96.00% | 33 | 5–6 | 57.00% |
| 11 | 11 | 30 | ||||||||
| Hoogendijk et al., (2018, 2020) | Students who scored high in SDQ and STRS conflict | Teachers | Two-arm RCT | TAU | 53 | 12 | 76.70% | 53 | 8–12 | 77.00% |
| 50 | 12 | 50 | ||||||||
| Hutchings et al. (2013) | Students who scored high in SDQ were selected | Teachers | Two-arm RCT | TAU | 6 | 8 | 100.00% | 13 | 3–7 | 66.60% |
| 6 | 11 | 14 | ||||||||
| LoCasale-Crouch et al. (2018) and Williford et al. (2017) | The top two boys and one girl who scored high on ADHD and ODD rating by ADHD and ODD Rating Scale DuPaul | Teachers | Three-arm RCT | TAU | 66 | 8 | 94.80% | 137 | 3–5 | 66.55% |
| 61 | 9 | 124 | ||||||||
| McCullough et al. (2021) | Children were included if they were at risk of having externalizing behavior based on ESP and SSBD | Teachers | Two-arm RCT | TAU | 14 | 6 | 100.00% | 25 | 8–9 | 82.00% |
| 12 | 6 | 20 | ||||||||
| Owens et al. (2017) | Children were included if they meet diagnostic criteria for ADHD or were at risk of ADHD based on DSM-IV | Teachers selected children, then coulure’s checked eligibility with parents | Two-arm RCT | AT | 29 | 14 | 93.00% | 27 | 6–12 | 77.60% |
| 27 | 14 | 29 | ||||||||
| Reinke et al. (2014) | Children were chosen by Observation of Classroom Adaptation– Checklist (TOCA-C): the top 15% of children with disruptive behavior were selected | Teachers | Two-arm RCT | AT | 34* | N/A | 91.00% | 23 | 3–8 | 69.50% |
| 23 | ||||||||||
| Spilt et al. (2012) | Children with externalizing behaviors above median level on Preschool Behavior Questionnaire (PBQ) | Teachers | Two-arm RCT | AT | 16 | 13 | N/A | 32 | 3–9 | 70.00% |
| 16 | 13 | 32 | ||||||||
| Stoiber and Gettinger (2011) | Children were selected by teachers as having challenging behaviors | Teachers | Three-arm RCT | TAU | 35 | 14 | 96.00% | 33 | 4–7 | 76.00% |
| 35 | 11 | 33 | ||||||||
| Sutherland et al., (2018a, 2018b) and Conroy et al., (2018, 2019) | Children were identified at risk for an EBD using (ESP) | Teachers | Two-arm RCT | TAU | 113 | 11 | 90.50% | 110 | 3–5 | 64.70% |
| 110 | 13 | 98 | ||||||||
| Sutherland et al. (2020) | Children were identified as preforming externalizing behaviors based on Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders SSBD | Teachers | Two-arm RCT | TAU | 14 | 6 | 100.00% | 25 | 7–8 | 82.50% |
| 16 | 6 | 20 | ||||||||
| Vancraeyveld et al. (2015a, 2015b) | Boys with high level of externalizing behavior were selected using the (PBQ) | Teachers | Two-arm RCT | TAU | 89 | N/A | 98.30% | 89 | 3–6 | 100.00% |
| 86 | 86 | |||||||||
| Veenman et al., (2017, 2019) | Children with ADHD symptoms based on the Disruptive Behavior Disorders Rating Scale (DBDRS) were chosen, followed by an interview with the teachers to confirm eligibility of the child based on the DSM-IV-TR | Teachers and cotches | Two-arm RCT | TAU | N/A | N/A | N/A | 58 | 6–13 | 84.00% |
| 56 |
AT, alternative treatment; C, Control; I, Intervention; TAU, treatment as usual; WLC, waiting list control; AC, active control
*These two studies provided the total number of teachers in the trial as they have only child outcomes