Search

Abstract Introduction Our group developed an Integrated Care Pathway to facilitate the delivery of evidence-based care for adolescents experiencing depression called CARIBOU-2 (Care for Adolescents who Receive Information ‘Bout OUtcomes, 2nd iteration). The core pathway components are assessment, psychoeducation, psychotherapy options, medication options, caregiver support, measurement-based care team reviews and graduation. We aim to test the clinical and implementation effectiveness of the CARIBOU-2 pathway relative to treatment-as-usual (TAU) in community mental health settings. Methods and analysis We will use a Type 1 Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation, Non-randomized Cluster Controlled Trial Design. Primary participants will be adolescents (planned n = 300, aged 13–18 years) with depressive symptoms, presenting to one of six community mental health agencies. All sites will begin in the TAU condition and transition to the CARIBOU-2 intervention after enrolling 25 adolescents. The primary clinical outcome is the rate of change of depressive symptoms from baseline to the 24-week endpoint using the Childhood Depression Rating Scale—Revised (CDRS-R). Generalized mixed effects modelling will be conducted to compare this outcome between intervention types. Our primary hypothesis is that there will be a greater rate of reduction in depressive symptoms in the group receiving the CARIBOU-2 intervention relative to TAU over 24 weeks as per the CDRS-R. Implementation outcomes will also be examined, including clinician fidelity to the pathway and its components, and cost-effectiveness. Ethics and dissemination Research ethics board approvals have been obtained. Should our results support our hypotheses, systematic implementation of the CARIBOU-2 intervention in other community mental health agencies would be indicated.

Abstract Background The economic shutdown and school closures associated with the COVID-19 pandemic have negatively influenced many young people’s educational and training opportunities, leading to an increase in youth not in education, employment, or training (NEET) globally and in Canada. NEET youth have a greater vulnerability to mental health and substance use problems, compared to their counterparts who are in school and/or employed. There is limited evidence on the association between COVID-19 and NEET youth. The objectives of this exploratory study included investigating: longitudinal associations between the COVID-19 pandemic and the mental health and substance use (MHSU) of NEET youth; and MHSU among subgroups of NEET and non-NEET youth. Methods 618 youth (14–28 years old) participated in this longitudinal, cohort study. Youth were recruited from four pre-existing studies at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health. Data on MHSU were collected across 11 time points during the COVID-19 pandemic (April 2020-August 2022). MHSU were measured using the CoRonavIruS Health Impact Survey Youth Self-Report, the Global Appraisal of Individual Needs Short Screener, and the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5. Linear Mixed Models and Generalized Estimating Equations were used to analyze associations of NEET status and time on mental health and substance use. Exploratory analyses were conducted to investigate interactions between sociodemographic characteristics and NEET status and time. Results At baseline, NEET youth were significantly more likely to screen positive for an internalizing disorder compared to non-NEET youth (OR = 1.92; 95%CI=[1.26–2.91] p = 0.002). No significant differences were found between youth with, and without, NEET in MHSU symptoms across the study time frame. Youth who had significantly higher odds of screening positive for an internalizing disorder included younger youth (OR = 1.06, 95%CI=[1.00-1.11]); youth who identify as Trans, non-binary or gender diverse (OR = 8.33, 95%CI=[4.17–16.17]); and those living in urban areas (OR = 1.35, 95%CI=[1.03–1.76]), compared to their counterparts. Youth who identify as White had significantly higher odds of screening positive for substance use problems (OR = 2.38, 95%CI=[1.72–3.23]) compared to racialized youth. Conclusions Our findings indicate that sociodemographic factors such as age, gender identity, ethnicity and area of residence impacted youth MHSU symptoms over the course of the study and during the pandemic. Overall, NEET status was not consistently associated with MHSU symptoms over and above these factors. The study contributes to evidence on MHSU symptoms of NEET youth.

As the COVID-19 pandemic evolves, it is important to continue providing accurate updates and public health information to various target audiences. In support of such efforts, this study aims to understand how youth have accessed information about COVID-19 and to record their perspectives on how such information is best communicated. As part of a larger longitudinal study, 463 youth (M = 21.2 years, SD = 2.2) were surveyed about their sources of information on COVID-19, with qualitative questions regarding their perspectives on optimal public health communication strategies. A majority of youth reported using online sources to access information about COVID-19, including online news sources and social media. They used a diversity of such sources, with a preference those they regarded as reliable. Participants recommended that public health information campaigns be conducted on a variety of social media channels. Other digital campaigns were also recommended, while some suggested providing information through schools. Information should be brief, engaging, accessible, and frequently updated, using verified sources to ensure accuracy. We conclude that, to reach youth effectively, it is essential that accurate COVID-19 information and public health guidelines be disseminated in an engaging manner using digital means, particularly social media. Communication campaigns should be developed in partnership with youth in order to best reach this audience with the information they need.

Abstract Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic underlined that guidelines and recommendations must be made more accessible and more understandable to the general public to improve health outcomes. The objective of this study is to evaluate, quantify, and compare the public’s understanding, usability, satisfaction, intention to implement, and preference for different ways of presenting COVID-19 health recommendations derived from the COVID-19 Living Map of Recommendations and Gateway to Contextualization (RecMap). Methods and analysis This is a protocol for a multi-method study. Through an online survey, we will conduct pragmatic allocation-concealed, blinded superiority randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in three populations to test alternative formats of presenting health recommendations: adults, parents, and youth, with at least 240 participants in each population. Prior to initiating the RCT, our interventions will have been refined with relevant stakeholder input. The intervention arm will receive a plain language recommendation (PLR) format while the control arm will receive the corresponding original recommendation format as originally published by the guideline organizations (standard language version). Our primary outcome is understanding, and our secondary outcomes are accessibility and usability, satisfaction, intended behavior, and preference for the recommendation formats. Each population’s results will be analyzed separately. However, we are planning a meta-analysis of the results across populations. At the end of each survey, participants will be invited to participate in an optional one-on-one, virtual semi-structured interview to explore their user experience. All interviews will be transcribed and analyzed using the principles of thematic analysis and a hybrid inductive and deductive approach. Ethics and dissemination Through Clinical Trials Ontario, the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board has reviewed and approved this protocol (Project ID: 3856). The University of Alberta has approved the parent portion of the trial (Project ID:00114894). Findings from this study will be disseminated through open-access publications in peer-reviewed journals and using social media. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05358990 . Registered on May 3, 2022

BackgroundRecent studies have suggested that the COVID-19 pandemic has increased existing health challenges experienced by transgender (trans) and non-binary people. Additionally, COVID-19 has also negatively impacted youth mental health. However, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic with respect to the intersection of youth and trans and non-binary populations is currently not well established. The present longitudinal qualitative study aimed to examine the evolving challenges experienced by trans and non-binary youth during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsGender-diverse youth, defined as participants who did not identify as cisgender in April 2020, were invited to participate from among the participant pool of a COVID-19 cohort study in Canada. Qualitative interviews were conducted in August 2020, January 2021, and August 2021, during the first year and a half of the COVID-19 pandemic. Qualitative themes were identified based on reflexive thematic analysis and plot-line narrative inquiry.ResultsTen participants aged 18 to 28 were included in the present analysis, yielding 29 transcripts. We identified themes of (1) losses of connection to gender-diverse communities, (2) changes in gender identity, affirmation, and self-reflection, (3) a dual burden of trans and non-binary specific health and service access challenges as well as COVID-19 pandemic related health challenges, and (4) virtually rebuilding gender-diverse communities during the COVID-19 pandemic.ConclusionsGender-diverse youth may experience unique challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. The losses with gender-diverse communities may further isolate queer people from access to healthcare, housing, and employment. Public health policy targeted at gender-diverse youth may consider addressing "upstream" disparities in healthcare and housing in order to support the rebuilding of queer and gender-diverse communities by gender-diverse people.

The objective of this paper was to examine the school-related experiences of youth during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants represented both clinical and community youth aged 14 to 28 who were sampled as part of a larger study. Feedback from youth attending school during the pandemic was qualitatively examined and youth who planned to attend school prior to the pandemic and did ( n = 246) and youth who planned to attend but did not ( n = 28) were compared quantitatively. Youth appreciated the flexibility of online learning and some also reported experiencing a lack of support from their school and the need for instructor training on how to deliver virtual classes effectively. Future studies should examine what factors influence student engagement with virtual learning, what strategies could improve supports for student in their long-term career development, and the longitudinal experiences of youth who may have chosen not to go back to school due to the pandemic. This survey was conducted in Ontario, Canada. A more diverse sample collected outside of Ontario would improve generalizability. Qualitative data were based on survey responses and not interviews. Thus we were unable to discern the reasons youth decided to attend school, or not, during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Abstract Background Problem-solving training is a common ingredient of evidence-based therapies for youth depression and has shown effectiveness as a versatile stand-alone intervention in adults. This scoping review provided a first overview of the evidence supporting problem solving as a mechanism for treating depression in youth aged 14 to 24 years. Methods Five bibliographic databases (APA PsycINFO, CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science) and the grey literature were systematically searched for controlled trials of stand-alone problem-solving therapy; secondary analyses of trial data exploring problem-solving-related concepts as predictors, moderators, or mediators of treatment response within broader therapies; and clinical practice guidelines for youth depression. Following the scoping review, an exploratory meta-analysis examined the overall effectiveness of stand-alone problem-solving therapy. Results Inclusion criteria were met by four randomized trials of problem-solving therapy (524 participants); four secondary analyses of problem-solving-related concepts as predictors, moderators, or mediators; and 23 practice guidelines. The only clinical trial rated as having a low risk of bias found problem-solving training helped youth solve personal problems but was not significantly more effective than the control at reducing emotional symptoms. An exploratory meta-analysis showed a small and non-significant effect on self-reported depression or emotional symptoms (Hedges’ g = − 0.34; 95% CI: − 0.92 to 0.23) with high heterogeneity. Removing one study at high risk of bias led to a decrease in effect size and heterogeneity (g = − 0.08; 95% CI: − 0.26 to 0.10). A GRADE appraisal suggested a low overall quality of the evidence. Tentative evidence from secondary analyses suggested problem-solving training might enhance outcomes in cognitive-behavioural therapy and family therapy, but dedicated dismantling studies are needed to corroborate these findings. Clinical practice guidelines did not recommend problem-solving training as a stand-alone treatment for youth depression, but five mentioned it as a treatment ingredient. Conclusions On its own, problem-solving training may be beneficial for helping youth solve personal challenges, but it may not measurably reduce depressive symptoms. Youth experiencing elevated depressive symptoms may require more comprehensive psychotherapeutic support alongside problem-solving training. High-quality studies are needed to examine the effectiveness of problem-solving training as a stand-alone approach and as a treatment ingredient.

Abstract Background To co‐ordinate a multidisciplinary team in the delivery of guideline recommendations using a measurement‐based care framework, our group previously developed a care pathway for the treatment of depression in adolescents. Core components of the pathway were: assessment, education, cognitive‐behavioural therapy, a caregiver intervention group, a medication algorithm, and monthly measurement‐based care “team reviews” with the adolescent present. The aim of this study was to test the feasibility of conducting a controlled clinical trial of the pathway. Method We conducted a 20‐week pilot controlled clinical trial of the care pathway relative to treatment as usual. Participants were adolescents (age 14–18) with a primary diagnosis of Major Depressive Disorder recruited from one of two outpatient psychiatric clinics at academic hospitals. Site of presentation was the method of allocation. Thirty‐five youth were allocated to the pathway and 31 were allocated to treatment as usual. As this is a pilot study, trial feasibility outcomes were of primary interest, including clinician fidelity to the care pathway. Results Our target sample size was recruited over a 15‐month time interval. Clinician fidelity and adolescent engagement in the care pathway components on a priori checklists were high (95% and 80%, respectively). We collected baseline and 20‐week endpoint data for our primary outcome of the Children's Depression Rating Scale – Revised (CDRS‐R) for 83% of the sample. On linear mixed effects modelling, we observed a linear decrease in CDRS‐R across 4‐week intervals up to the 20‐week endpoint in both groups (β = −2.07; 95% CI −3.14 to −1.01). Conclusion A controlled clinical trial of a complex, multi‐component intervention for the treatment of depression in adolescents is feasible. Given the need to find optimal strategies to deliver effective care for adolescents with depression, a definitive randomized controlled trial of the pathway is warranted. Trial is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03428555

Abstract Background There is increasing emphasis on engaging youth in research about youth, their needs, experiences and preferences, notably in health services research. By engaging youth as full partners, research becomes more feasible and relevant, and the validity and richness of findings are enhanced. Consequently, researchers need guidance in engaging youth effectively. This study examines the experiences, needs and knowledge gaps of researchers. Methods Eighty‐four researchers interested in youth engagement training were recruited via snowball sampling. They completed a survey regarding their youth engagement experiences, attitudes, perceived barriers and capacity development needs. Data were analysed descriptively, and comparisons were made based on current engagement experience. Results Participants across career stages and disciplines expressed an interest in increased capacity development for youth engagement. They had positive attitudes about the importance and value of youth engagement, but found it to be complex. Participants reported requiring practical guidance to develop their youth engagement practices and interest in a network of youth‐engaged researchers and on‐going training. Those currently engaging youth were more likely to report the need for greater appreciation of youth engagement by funders and institutions. Conclusions Engaging youth in research has substantial benefits. However, skills in collaborating with youth to design, conduct and implement research have to be learned. Researchers need concrete training and networking opportunities to develop and maximize these skills. They also need mechanisms that formally acknowledge the value of engagement. Researchers and those promoting youth engagement in research are encouraged to consider these findings in their promotion and training endeavours.