A cluster randomised, 16-week, parallel-group multicentre trial to compare the effectiveness of a digital school-based cognitive behavioural resilience/wellbeing-building intervention targeting emotional and behavioural problems in vulnerable Year 4 primary school children in whole classes, to the usual school curriculum: a study protocol to the "CUES for Schools" trial.

BACKGROUND: Around 10% of school-aged children experience mental health difficulties. Many more are 'vulnerable': experiencing emotional and/or behavioural problems reaching clinical levels, and thus at greatest risk of future mental illness. The trial aim is to evaluate the effectiveness of the CUES for schools programme in reducing emotional and behavioural problems in vulnerable children. METHODS: The "CUES for Schools" study is a multicentre cluster randomised controlled trial in primary schools in south east England. Schools will be randomised to receive the usual school curriculum, or the CUES programme (1:1). We aim to enrol 74 schools (5550 children including 2220 vulnerable children). CUES is a whole-class teacher-facilitated interactive digital cognitive-behavioural intervention, delivered as 24 short (20-min) modules over 12 weeks, targeting emotional/behavioural regulation skills. Children self-report emotional/behavioural problems at baseline, 8, and 16 weeks, and wellbeing and cognitive vulnerability at 0 and 16 weeks. Adverse events are assessed at 8 and 16 weeks. Teachers rate classroom behaviour at baseline and 16 weeks. School senior leadership teams and individual teachers consent to involvement in the study; parents can opt their child out of CUES sessions, assessments, or research. Children can similarly opt out and assent to research participation. The primary objective of this trial is to evaluate the effectiveness of CUES for schools compared to the usual school curriculum in improving emotional/behavioural problems for vulnerable Year 4 (8-9 years old) children at 16 weeks post-randomisation, as measured using a standardised questionnaire designed for primary schools. The secondary objective is to investigate the impact of the CUES for schools programme on both vulnerable and non-vulnerable children on wellbeing and teacher-rated classroom behaviour. DISCUSSION: The study will show whether CUES for schools is more effective than the usual curriculum in reducing emotional and behavioural problems in vulnerable Year 4 children, and thus reducing the risk of mental health difficulties in later adolescent and adult life. As a digital, teacher-facilitated intervention, CUES for schools can be readily implemented, at minimal cost. If effective, CUES for schools therefore has the potential to reduce the impact of emotional/behavioural difficulties on children's learning, behaviour, and relationships and the burden of future mental health morbidity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial Registration ISRCTN11445338. Registered on September 12, 2022.

Distressing psychotic-like experiences, cognitive functioning and early developmental markers in clinically referred young people aged 8-18 years.

PURPOSE: Neurocognitive difficulties and early childhood speech/motor delays are well documented amongst older adolescents and young adults considered at risk for psychosis-spectrum diagnoses. We aimed to test associations between unusual or psychotic-like experiences (PLEs), co-occurring distress/emotional symptoms, current cognitive functioning and developmental delays/difficulties in young people (aged 8-18 years) referred to Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services in South London, UK. METHODS: Study 1 examined receptive language, verbal learning and caregiver-reported speech and motor delays/difficulties in a sample of 101 clinically-referred children aged 8-14 years, comparing those reporting no PLEs (n = 19), PLEs without distress (n = 16), and PLEs with distress (n = 66). Study 2 tested associations of severity of distressing PLEs with vocabulary, perceptual reasoning, word reading and developmental delays/difficulties in a second sample of 122 adolescents aged 12-18 years with distressing PLEs. RESULTS: In Study 1, children with distressing PLEs had lower receptive language and delayed recall and higher rates of developmental delays/difficulties than the no-PLE and non-distressing PLE groups (F values: 2.3-2.8; p values: < 0.005). Receptive language (ß = 0.24, p = 0.03) and delayed recall (ß = - 0.17, p = 0.02) predicted PLE distress severity. In Study 2, the cognitive-developmental variables did not significantly predict PLE distress severity (ß values = 0.01-0.22, p values: > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Findings may be consistent with a cognitive-developmental model relating distressing PLEs in youth with difficulties in cognitive functioning. This highlights the potential utility of adjunctive cognitive strategies which target mechanisms associated with PLE distress. These could be included in cognitive-behavioural interventions offered prior to the development of an at-risk mental state in mental health, educational or public health settings.

Understanding the relationship between schematic beliefs, bullying, and unusual experiences in 8-14 year olds.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive models of adult psychosis propose that negative schematic beliefs (NSBs) mediate the established association between victimisation and psychotic symptoms. In childhood, unusual, or psychotic-like, experiences are associated with bullying (a common form of victimisation) and NSBs. This study tests the mediating role of NSBs in the relationship between bullying and distressing unusual experiences (UEDs) in childhood. METHOD: Ninety-four 8-14 year olds referred to community Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services completed self-report assessments of UEDs, bullying, and NSBs about the self (NS) and others (NO). RESULTS: Both NS and NO were associated with bullying (NS: r=.40, P<.001; NO: r=.33, P=.002), and with UEDs (NS: r=.51, P<.001; NO: r=.43, P<.001). Both NS and NO significantly mediated the relationship between bullying and UEDs (NS: z=3.15, P=.002; NO: z=2.35, P=.019). CONCLUSIONS: Children's NSBs may mediate the adverse psychological impact of victimisation, and are appropriate treatment targets for young people with UEDs. Early educational intervention to reduce negative appraisals of the self and others may increase resilience to future adverse experiences and reduce later mental health risk.

A preliminary investigation of schematic beliefs and unusual experiences in children.

BACKGROUND: In cognitive models of adult psychosis, schematic beliefs about the self and others are important vulnerability and maintaining factors, and are therefore targets for psychological interventions. Schematic beliefs have not previously been investigated in children with distressing unusual, or psychotic-like, experiences (UEDs). The aim of this study was firstly to investigate whether a measure of schematic beliefs, originally designed for adults with psychosis, was suitable for children; and secondly, to examine the association of childhood schematic beliefs with internalising and externalising problems and with UEDs. METHOD: Sixty-seven children aged 8-14 years, with emotional and behavioural difficulties, completed measures of UEDs, internalising (depression and anxiety), and externalising (conduct and hyperactivity-inattention) problems, together with the Brief Core Schema Scales (BCSS). RESULTS: The BCSS was readily completed by participants, and scale psychometric properties were good. Children tended to view themselves and others positively. Internalising and externalising problems and UEDs were all associated with negative schematic beliefs; effect sizes were small to medium. CONCLUSIONS: Schematic beliefs in young people can be measured using the BCSS, and negative schematic beliefs are associated with childhood psychopathology and with UEDs. Schematic beliefs may therefore form a useful target in psychological interventions for young people with UEDs.

A time to die: withdrawal of paediatric intensive care.

Each individual has the right to a dignified death, which may necessitate a decision to cease active treatment. The key to making such a decision is communication between professionals, child and family. Ethical principles may help to provide a basis and structure for decision making. It may be useful for units to formulate a decision-making framework based on an agreed ethical approach. As a minor, the child is non-autonomous and his/her interests are represented by the parents; however, it is essential that the child is included, if possible, in the decision-making process. The nurse is responsible for updating him/herself on ethical issues, and acquiring the knowledge necessary to represent both the child and his/her colleagues in discussion. Withdrawal of aggressive care does not mean abandoning the child and family. On the contrary, all the skills and resources available will be required to ensure a peaceful and dignified death, and to support the child and family.