Abstract
There is growing evidence that universal school-based mental health interventions can lead to negative outcomes in young people. This is a critical ethical issue, especially when young people cannot easily opt out of interventions run during school hours. So far, however, there is no guidance available about potential harms for researchers designing and running these interventions. In this Perspective, we set out five research recommendations: (1) acknowledge the possibility of potential harms; (2) identify types of potential harms; (3) measure and report potential harms in all outputs; (4) consider adverse events (for example, a suicide attempt); and (5) consider participant dropout and disengagement. Using simulated data, we demonstrate that even if trials show small negative effects, this could lead to considerable harm if interventions are scaled up across the population. Furthering research in this area will help ensure the field delivers interventions that are most effective and least harmful for everyone.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles
$59.00 per year
only $4.92 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The simulated data are available online (https://osf.io/pe53k/files/osfstorage).
Code availability
The simulation code is available online (https://osf.io/pe53k/files/osfstorage).
References
Junqueira, D. R. et al. Time to improve the reporting of harms in randomized controlled trials. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 136, 216–220 (2021).
Hayes, D. & Za’ba, N. What metrics of harm are being captured in clinical trials involving talking treatments for young people? A systematic review of registered studies on the ISRCTN. Couns. Psychother. Res. 22, 108–129 (2022).
Lilienfeld, S. O. Psychological treatments that cause harm. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 2, 53–70 (2007).
Rozental, A. et al. The negative effects questionnaire: psychometric properties of an instrument for assessing negative effects in psychological treatments. Behav. Cogn. Psychother. 47, 559–572 (2019).
Reporting safety information on clinical trials. European Medicines Agency https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory/research-development/clinical-trials/reporting-safety-information-clinical-trials (2022).
Investigator Responsibilities – Safety Reporting for Investigational Drugs and Devices: Draft Guidance for Industry (US Food and Drug Administration, 2021); https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/investigator-responsibilities-safety-reporting-investigational-drugs-and-devices
Papaioannou, D., Cooper, C., Mooney, C., Glover, R. & Coates, E. Adverse event recording failed to reflect potential harms: a review of trial protocols of behavioral, lifestyle and psychological therapy interventions. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 136, 64–76 (2021).
Meister, R. et al. Adverse event methods were heterogeneous and insufficiently reported in randomized trials on persistent depressive disorder. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 71, 97–108 (2016).
Werner-Seidler, A. et al. School-based depression and anxiety prevention programs: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 89, 102079 (2021).
Fisak, B., Griffin, K., Nelson, C., Gallegos-Guajardo, J. & Davila, S. The effectiveness of the FRIENDS programs for children and adolescents: a meta-analytic review. Ment. Health Prev. 30, 200271 (2023).
Zhang, Q., Wang, J. & Neitzel, A. School-based mental health interventions targeting depression or anxiety: a meta-analysis of rigorous randomized controlled trials for school-aged children and adolescents. J. Youth Adolesc. 52, 195–217 (2023).
Caldwell, D. M. et al. School-based interventions to prevent anxiety and depression in children and young people: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Lancet Psychiatry 6, 1011–1020 (2019).
Phillips, S. & Mychailyszyn, M. The effect of school-based mindfulness interventions on anxious and depressive symptoms: a meta-analysis. School Ment. Health 14, 455–469 (2022).
Mackenzie, K. & Williams, C. Universal, school-based interventions to promote mental and emotional well-being: what is being done in the UK and does it work? A systematic review. BMJ Open 8, e022560 (2018).
Foulkes, L. & Stringaris, A. Do no harm: can school mental health interventions cause iatrogenic harm? BJPsych Bull. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjb.2023.9 (2023).
Andrews, J. L. et al. Evaluating the effectiveness of a universal eHealth school-based prevention programme for depression and anxiety, and the moderating role of friendship network characteristics. Psychol Med. 53, 5042–5051 (2023).
Seely, H. D., Gaskins, J., Pössel, P. & Hautzinger, M. Comprehensive prevention: an evaluation of peripheral outcomes of a school-based prevention program. Res. Child Adolesc. Psychopathol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-023-01043-2 (2023).
Harvey, L. J., White, F. A., Hunt, C. & Abbott, M. Investigating the efficacy of a dialectical behaviour therapy-based universal intervention on adolescent social and emotional well-being outcomes. Behav. Res. Ther. 169, 104408 (2023).
Wigelsworth, M. et al. FRIENDS for Life: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary (Education Endowment Foundation, 2018).
Stallard, P. et al. A cluster randomised controlled trial to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of classroom-based cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) in reducing symptoms of depression in high-risk adolescents. Health Technol. Assess. 17, 1–109 (2013).
Montero-Marin, J. et al. School-based mindfulness training in early adolescence: what works, for whom and how in the MYRIAD trial? BMJ Ment. Health 25, 117–124 (2022).
Bannirchelvam, B., Bell, K. L. & Costello, S. A qualitative exploration of primary school students’ experience and utilisation of mindfulness. Contemp. School Psychol. 21, 304–316 (2017).
Skryabina, E. et al. Child, teacher and parent perceptions of the FRIENDS classroom-based universal anxiety prevention programme: a qualitative study. School Ment. Health 8, 486–498 (2016).
Garmy, P., Berg, A. & Clausson, E. K. A qualitative study exploring adolescents’ experiences with a school-based mental health program. BMC Public Health 15, 1074 (2015).
Miller, E. J., Crane, C., Medlicott, E., Robson, J. & Taylor, L. Non-positive experiences encountered by pupils during participation in a mindfulness-informed school-based intervention. School Ment. Health https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-023-09591-0 (2023).
Bastounis, A., Callaghan, P., Lykomitrou, F., Aubeeluck, A. & Michail, M. Exploring students’ participation in universal, depression and anxiety, prevention programmes at school: a meta-aggregation. School Ment. Health 9, 372–385 (2017).
Lindholm, S. K. & Zetterqvist Nelson, K. ‘Apparently i’ve got low self-esteem’: schoolgirls’ perspectives on a school-based public health intervention. Child. Soc. 29, 473–483 (2015).
Peters, L. et al. Young people’s evaluation of an online mental health prevention program for secondary school students: a mixed-methods formative study. Ment. Health Prev. 30, 200263 (2023).
March, A. et al. Shall we send a panda?’ A practical guide to engaging schools in research: learning from large-scale mental health intervention trials. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 19, 3367 (2022).
Demkowicz, O. et al. Children and young people’s experiences of completing mental health and wellbeing measures for research: learning from two school-based pilot projects. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry Ment. Health 14, 35 (2020).
Bradshaw, C. P., Debnam, K. J., Player, D., Bowden, B. & Lindstrom Johnson, S. A mixed-methods approach for embedding cost analysis within fidelity assessment in school-based programs. Behav. Disord. 48, 174–186 (2023).
Axford, N., Berry, V., Lloyd, J. & Wyatt, K. How can we optimise learning from trials in child and adolescent mental health? Evid. Based Ment. Health 25, 93–95 (2022).
Palermo, T. M., Slack, K., Loren, D., Eccleston, C. & Jamison, R. N. Measuring and reporting adverse events in clinical trials of psychological treatments for chronic pain. Pain 161, 713–717 (2020).
Carey, E., Ridler, I., Ford, T. & Stringaris, A. When is a ‘small effect’ actually large and impactful? J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry 64, 1643–1647 (2022).
Palmer, S. & Raftery, J. Economics notes: opportunity cost. Brit. Med. J. 318, 1551–1552 (1999).
Beecham, J. & Knapp, M. in Measuring Mental Health Needs 163–183 (Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1992).
Kuyken, W. et al. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of universal school-based mindfulness training compared with normal school provision in reducing risk of mental health problems and promoting well-being in adolescence: the MYRIAD cluster randomised controlled trial. Evid. Based Ment. Health 25, 99–109 (2022).
Lorenc, T. & Oliver, K. Adverse effects of public health interventions: a conceptual framework. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 68, 288–290 (2014).
Bonell, C., Jamal, F., Melendez-Torres, G. J. & Cummins, S. ‘Dark logic’: theorising the harmful consequences of public health interventions. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 69, 95–98 (2015).
McKnight, P. E. & Kashdan, T. B. The importance of functional impairment to mental health outcomes: a case for reassessing our goals in depression treatment research. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 29, 243–259 (2009).
Andrews, J. L. & Schweizer, S. The need for functional assessments in school-based mental health intervention research. JAMA Psychiatry 80, 103 (2023).
Evans, R., Scourfield, J. & Murphy, S. The unintended consequences of targeting: young people’s lived experiences of social and emotional learning interventions. Br. Educ. Res. J. 41, 381–397 (2015).
Shelemy, L., Harvey, K. & Waite, P. Supporting students’ mental health in schools: what do teachers want and need? Emot. Behav. Diffic. 24, 100–116 (2019).
Foulkes, L. & Stapley, E. Want to improve school mental health interventions? Ask young people what they actually think. J. Philos. Educ. 56, 41–50 (2022).
Involving children and young people in research: Top tips and essential key issues for researchers. INVOLVE https://www.invo.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/involvingcyp-top-tips-January2016.pdf (2016).
Prior, K. et al. Youth participation in mental health and substance use research: Implementation, perspectives, and learnings of the Matilda Centre Youth Advisory Board. Ment. Health Prev. 28, 200251 (2022).
Hoke, A. M., Rosen, P., Pileggi, F., Molinari, A. & Sekhar, D. L. Evaluation of a stakeholder advisory board for an adolescent mental health randomized clinical trial. Res. Involv. Engagem. 9, 17 (2023).
Montero-Marin, J. et al. Do adolescents like school-based mindfulness training? Predictors of mindfulness practice and responsiveness in the MYRIAD trial. J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 62, 1256–1269 (2023).
Ioannidis, J. P. A. Better reporting of harms in randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. Ann. Intern. Med. 141, 781–788 (2004).
Armitage, J. M. et al. Cross-cohort change in parent-reported emotional problem trajectories across childhood and adolescence in the UK. Lancet Psychiatry 10, P509–517 (2023).
Junqueira, D. R. et al. CONSORT Harms 2022 statement, explanation, and elaboration: updated guideline for the reporting of harms in randomised trials. Brit. Med. J. 381, e073725 (2023).
Linden, M. How to define, find and classify side effects in psychotherapy: from unwanted events to adverse treatment reactions: side effects in psychotherapy: the UE-ATR checklist. Clin. Psychol. Psychother. 20, 286–296 (2013).
Moritz, S. et al. It can’t hurt, right? Adverse effects of psychotherapy in patients with depression. Eur. Arch. Psychiatry Clin. Neurosci. 269, 577–586 (2019).
Schermuly-Haupt, M.-L., Linden, M. & Rush, A. J. Unwanted events and side effects in cognitive behavior therapy. Cogn. Ther. Res. 42, 219–229 (2018).
Farias, M., Maraldi, E., Wallenkampf, K. C. & Lucchetti, G. Adverse events in meditation practices and meditation‐based therapies: a systematic review. Acta Psychiatr. Scand. 142, 374–393 (2020).
Britton, W. B., Lindahl, J. R., Cooper, D. J., Canby, N. K. & Palitsky, R. Defining and measuring meditation-related adverse effects in mindfulness-based programs. Clin. Psychol. Sci. 9, 1185–1204 (2021).
Hanley, J. A. If nothing goes wrong, is everything all right?: interpreting zero numerators. JAMA 249, 1743–1745 (1983).
Lockwood, J., Townsend, E., Royes, L., Daley, D. & Sayal, K. What do young adolescents think about taking part in longitudinal self-harm research? Findings from a school-based study. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry Ment. Health 12, 23 (2018).
Fernandez, E., Salem, D., Swift, J. K. & Ramtahal, N. Meta-analysis of dropout from cognitive behavioral therapy: magnitude, timing, and moderators. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 83, 1108–1122 (2015).
De Haan, A. M., Boon, A. E., De Jong, J. T. V. M., Hoeve, M. & Vermeiren, R. R. J. M. A meta-analytic review on treatment dropout in child and adolescent outpatient mental health care. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 33, 698–711 (2013).
Neil, A. L., Batterham, P., Christensen, H., Bennett, K. & Griffiths, K. M. Predictors of adherence by adolescents to a cognitive behavior therapy website in school and community-based settings. J. Med. Internet Res. 11, e6 (2009).
Ozer, E. J., Newlan, S., Douglas, L. & Hubbard, E. ‘Bounded’ empowerment: analyzing tensions in the practice of youth-led participatory research in urban public schools. Am. J. Community Psychol. 52, 13–26 (2013).
Demkowicz, O. et al. We want it to be a culture’: children and young people’s perceptions of what underpins and undermines education-based wellbeing provision. BMC Public Health 23, 1305 (2023).
Wynters, R., Liddle, S. K., Swann, C., Schweickle, M. J. & Vella, S. A. Qualitative evaluation of a sports-based mental health literacy program for adolescent males. Psychol. Sport Exerc. 56, 101989 (2021).
Cohen, K. A. & Schleider, J. L. Adolescent dropout from brief digital mental health interventions within and beyond randomized trials. Internet Interventions 27, 100496 (2022).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
L.F. conceptualized the manuscript and wrote the original draft. All authors reviewed and edited subsequent drafts, and read and agreed to the final version.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review
Peer review information
Nature Mental Health thanks Rosie Mansfield, Nicola Newton and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Foulkes, L., Andrews, J.L., Reardon, T. et al. Research recommendations for assessing potential harm from universal school-based mental health interventions. Nat. Mental Health 2, 270–277 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44220-024-00208-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s44220-024-00208-2