ARTICLE
Targeted Prevention of Unipolar Depressive Disorder in an At-Risk Sample of High School Adolescents: A Randomized Trial of a Group Cognitive Intervention

https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-199503000-00016Get rights and content

ABSTRACT

Objective

This investigation attempted to prevent unipolar depressive episodes in a sample of high school adolescents with an elevated risk of depressive disorder.

Method

Adolescents at risk for future depressive disorder by virtue of having elevated depressive symptomatology were selected with a two-stage case-finding procedure. The Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale (CES-D) was administered to 1,652 students; adolescents with elevated CES-D scores were interviewed with the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children. Subjects with current affective diagnoses were referred to nonexperimental services. The remaining 150 consenting subjects were considered at risk for future depression and randomized to either a 15-session cognitive group prevention intervention or an “usual care” control condition. Subjects were reassessed for DSM-III-R diagnostic status after the intervention and at 6− and 12-month follow-up points.

Results

Survival analyses indicated a significant 12-month advantage for the prevention program, with affective disorder total incidence rates of 14.5% for the active intervention, versus 25.7% for the control condition. No differences were detected for nonaffective disorders across the study period.

Conclusion

Depressive disorder can be successfully prevented among adolescents with an elevated future risk.

REFERENCES (48)

  • GN Clarke

    Methodological issues in outcome studies of school-based interventions for the prevention of adolescent depression

    Sch Psychol Q

    (1993)
  • GN Clarke et al.

    School-based primary prevention of depressive symptomatology in adolescents: findings from two studies

    J Adolesc Res

    (1993)
  • GN Clarke et al.

    Instructor's Manual for the Adolescent Coping with Depression Course

    (1990)
  • GN Clarke et al.

    A self- and parent-report measure of adolescent depression: the Child Behavior Checklist Depression Scale (CBCL-D)

    Behav Assess

    (1992)
  • J Cohen

    A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales

    Educ Psychol Meas

    (1960)
  • BP Dohrenwend et al.

    Toward the development of a two-stage procedure for case identification and classification in psychiatric epidemiology

  • BP Dohrenwend et al.

    Nonspecific psychological distress and other dimensions of psychopathology

    Arch Gen Psychiatry

    (1980)
  • WW Eaton et al.

    The incidence of specific DIS/DSM-III mental disorders: data from the NIMH Epidemiological Catchment Area Program

    Acta Psychiatr Scand

    (1989)
  • J Endicott et al.

    Hamilton Depression Rating Scale: extracted from regular and change versions of the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia

    Arch Gen Psychiatry

    (1981)
  • E Frank et al.

    Three-year outcomes for maintenance therapies in recurrent depression

    Arch Gen Psychiatry

    (1990)
  • Gotlib IH, Lewinsohn PM, Seeley JR (in press), Elevated symptoms of depression versus a diagnosis of depression:...
  • M Hamilton

    A rating scale for depression

    J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry

    (1960)
  • C Hammen

    Self-cognitions, stressful events, and the prediction of depression in children of depressed mothers

    J Abnorm Child Psychol

    (1988)
  • C Jaenicke et al.

    Cognitive vulnerability in children at risk for depression

    J Abnorm Child Psychol

    (1987)
  • Cited by (536)

    • Preventative Interventions for Childhood and Adolescent Disorders

      2022, Comprehensive Clinical Psychology, Second Edition
    • A Meta-analytic Review: Psychological Treatment of Subthreshold Depression in Children and Adolescents

      2021, Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
      Citation Excerpt :

      The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow chart describing the inclusion process, including the reasons for exclusion, is presented in Figure 1. A total of 12 randomized controlled trials (with 13 comparisons between a psychotherapy and a control group) met inclusion criteria for this meta-analysis.31-42 Ten of these studies with 11 comparisons included adolescents (mean age 12−18 years), and 2 studies included children (mean age <12 years).

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    This study was supported by NIMH grant R03-MH48118. For their assistance, we thank Peter Meuhrer, Ph.D., Barbara Kidd, Laura Fenn, Dori Calhoun, Judy DeCourcy, Robin Lieberman, Joyce Liljeholm, Chris Mills, Jackie Rose, and Betty Schallberger; and Oregon City, Gresham, and Lincoln High Schools.

    View full text