What CBT Modules Work Best for Whom? Identifying Subgroups of Depressed Youths by Their Differential Response to Specific Modules.

Prior research suggests that the effects of specific cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) modules on symptom outcomes can be estimated. We conducted a study utilizing idiographic and nomothetic methods to clarify which CBT modules are most effective for youth depression, and for whom they are most effective. Thirty-five youths received modular CBT for depression. Interrupted time series models estimated whether the introduction of each module was associated with changes in internalizing symptoms, whereby significant symptom reduction would suggest a therapeutic response to the module. Regression models were used to explore whether participant characteristics predicted subgroups of youths based on their estimated response to certain types (e.g., cognitive) of modules, and whether group membership was associated with posttreatment outcomes. Thirty youths (86%) had at least one module associated with a significant change in internalizing symptoms from premodule delivery to postmodule delivery. The specific modules associated with these changes varied across youths. Behavioral activation was most frequently associated with symptom decreases (34% of youths). No participant characteristics predicted estimated response to module type, and group membership was not significantly associated with posttreatment outcomes. Youths display highly heterogeneous responses to treatment modules, indicating multiple pathways to symptom improvement for depressed youths.

Accounting for diversity in the treatment of suicide and self-injury: A systematic review of the past 50 years of randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: Patients receiving treatment for self-injurious thoughts and behaviors (SITBs) have diverse backgrounds, yet it remains unclear exactly who is represented in the current SITB treatment literature. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the past 50 years of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing SITB treatments to evaluate sampling practices and reporting of sample characteristics, as well as inclusion of global populations across the included 525 papers. We also assessed changes over the past five decades in these three domains. RESULTS: SITB RCTs frequently reported age and sex (98.6%-95.1%), less frequently reported race (83.4%-38.6%), socioeconomic status (48.1%-46.1%) and ethnicity (41.9%-8.1%), and rarely reported LGBTQ+ status (3.7%-1.6%). U.S.-based RCTs featured predominantly White, non-Hispanic, and non-LGBTQ+ samples. Most RCTs were conducted in high-income North American or European countries. Sample reporting practices, sample representativeness, and inclusion of global populations modestly and inconsistently improved over time. CONCLUSIONS: There has not been substantial improvement in reporting practices, sample representativeness, or inclusion of global populations in SITB RCTs over the past 50 years. Acknowledging who is being studied and representing diverse populations in SITB treatment research is key to connecting research advances with those who may need it most.

Identifying Person-Specific Drivers of Depression in Adolescents: Protocol for a Smartphone-Based Ecological Momentary Assessment and Passive Sensing Study.

BACKGROUND: Adolescence is marked by an increasing risk of depression and is an optimal window for prevention and early intervention. Personalizing interventions may be one way to maximize therapeutic benefit, especially given the marked heterogeneity in depressive presentations. However, empirical evidence that can guide personalized intervention for youth is lacking. Identifying person-specific symptom drivers during adolescence could improve outcomes by accounting for both developmental and individual differences. OBJECTIVE: This study leverages adolescents' everyday smartphone use to investigate person-specific drivers of depression and validate smartphone-based mobile sensing data against established ambulatory methods. We describe the methods of this study and provide an update on its status. After data collection is completed, we will address three specific aims: (1) identify idiographic drivers of dynamic variability in depressive symptoms, (2) test the validity of mobile sensing against ecological momentary assessment (EMA) and actigraphy for identifying these drivers, and (3) explore adolescent baseline characteristics as predictors of these drivers. METHODS: A total of 50 adolescents with elevated symptoms of depression will participate in 28 days of (1) smartphone-based EMA assessing depressive symptoms, processes, affect, and sleep; (2) mobile sensing of mobility, physical activity, sleep, natural language use in typed interpersonal communication, screen-on time, and call frequency and duration using the Effortless Assessment of Risk States smartphone app; and (3) wrist actigraphy of physical activity and sleep. Adolescents and caregivers will complete developmental and clinical measures at baseline, as well as user feedback interviews at follow-up. Idiographic, within-subject networks of EMA symptoms will be modeled to identify each adolescent's person-specific drivers of depression. Correlations among EMA, mobile sensor, and actigraph measures of sleep, physical, and social activity will be used to assess the validity of mobile sensing for identifying person-specific drivers. Data-driven analyses of mobile sensor variables predicting core depressive symptoms (self-reported mood and anhedonia) will also be used to assess the validity of mobile sensing for identifying drivers. Finally, between-subject baseline characteristics will be explored as predictors of person-specific drivers. RESULTS: As of October 2023, 84 families were screened as eligible, of whom 70% (n=59) provided informed consent and 46% (n=39) met all inclusion criteria after completing baseline assessment. Of the 39 included families, 85% (n=33) completed the 28-day smartphone and actigraph data collection period and follow-up study visit. CONCLUSIONS: This study leverages depressed adolescents' everyday smartphone use to identify person-specific drivers of adolescent depression and to assess the validity of mobile sensing for identifying these drivers. The findings are expected to offer novel insights into the structure and dynamics of depressive symptomatology during a sensitive period of development and to inform future development of a scalable, low-burden smartphone-based tool that can guide personalized treatment decisions for depressed adolescents. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/43931.

How do cognitive behavioral therapy and interpersonal psychotherapy improve youth depression? Applying meta-analytic structural equation modeling to three decades of randomized trials.

Investigating the mechanisms through which psychotherapy brings about desired change can inform efforts to improve therapies. We applied meta-analytic structural equation modeling (MASEM) to assess putative change mechanisms for cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) as mediators of youth depression treatment outcome. Then, we tested whether candidate mediators (CMs) showed evidence of treatment-specificity to CBT versus interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT). Literature searches identified 34 randomized trials (27 CBT, 6 IPT, 1 CBT/IPT, 3,868 participants, published 1982-2020) that measured seven CMs: negative cognition, social engagement, family functioning, pleasant activity engagement, problem solving, reframing, or avoidance. We assessed mediational pathways and whether posttreatment CMs mediated treatment effects on posttreatment depression symptoms, covarying pretreatment CMs, and symptoms. Treatment type was tested as a moderator of mediational pathways. Results show that negative cognition (24 trials) and pleasant activities (3 trials) mediated depression symptom outcome in CBT. Social engagement and family functioning showed stronger mediation in IPT (5 and 6 trials) than in CBT (14 and 13 trials). We conclude that negative cognition is a robust mediator of CBT but may not be treatment-specific; pleasant activities may also be a mediator of CBT. However, the lack of treatment or mediation effects involving problem solving and reframing contradicts CBT theory. In contrast, social and family mechanisms appear to be IPT-specific mediators. These conclusions are provisional due to small samples examining IPT and several CMs, limitations in CM measurement (i.e., posttreatment retrospective report), and assumptions of MASEM-and will need to be confirmed when more and better evidence accumulates. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).