Increasing Access - Identification and Intervention

Question 1

Anderson et al (2018)

Answer 1

With identification and recognition common parent-perceived barrier (Reardon et al., 2017), with school being key environment for CYP, perhaps most practical place to increase this

Systematic school-based approaches detect greater proportion of CYP with MHD compared with less formal processes (i.e., ad-hoc teacher or parent identification, self-identification), with students identified in school more likely to receive support by parents/teachers, and referral to services, and achieve better long-term outcomes compared to students identified in community healthcare settings

Meta-review showed some evidence for universal screening but high rate of false-positive results here

Didn’t focus on ADs, and much heterogeneity in studies, absence of randomised studies, and poor outcome reporting

Question 2

Reardon et al (2022) and Green et al (2021) iCATS-i2i

Answer 2

Have developed a 2-item parent-report child anxiety questionnaire able to identify children with and without ADs in community sample with high sensitivity and specificity

When referring directly to specific intervention, that of OSI (Online Support and Intervention for Childhood Anxiety), COVID-19 disrupted feasibility study conclusions, but procedures well-received by all parties, and pre-post-intervention questionnaire responses indicated positive results for families who received OSI