Quality of Research
Documents Reviewed
The documents below were reviewed for Quality of Research. The research point of
contact can provide information regarding the studies reviewed and the availability
of additional materials, including those from more recent studies that may have been conducted.
Study 1Seligman, M. E., Schulman, P., DeRubeis, R. J., & Hollon, S. D. (1999). The prevention of depression and anxiety. Prevention and Treatment, 2(8) [Serial online]. URL: http://www.journals.apa.org/prevention/volume2/pre0020008a.html Study 2Seligman, M. E., Schulman, P., & Tryon, A. M. (2007). Group prevention of depression and anxiety symptoms. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 45(6), 1111-1126. 
Supplementary Materials Buchanan, G. M., Gardenswartz, C. A., & Seligman, M. E. (1999). Physical health following a cognitive-behavioral intervention. Prevention and Treatment [Serial online].
Horowitz, J. L., & Garber, J. (2006). The prevention of depressive symptoms in children and adolescents: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 74(3), 401-415.
Outcomes
| Outcome 1: Episodes of depression |
|
Description of Measures
|
The Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-III-R (SCID) was used as a diagnostic interview for episodes of depression at the preworkshop phase of the study. At subsequent interviews, the Longitudinal Interval Follow-Up Evaluation (LIFE), modified to reflect DSM-III-R criteria, was used. These measures rate depression on a scale of 1 through 6; a rating of 3 is considered moderate depression, a rating of 4 is marked depression, a rating of 5 is definite depression, and a rating of 6 is severe depression. One study used a short, self-report version of LIFE to determine which participants might be having current episodes of depression. This instrument included eight yes/no questions pertaining to depression, yielding a score of 0 to 8 (low scores indicating a low level of depression).
|
|
Key Findings
|
In one study, 19% of students in the intervention group had moderate depressive episodes, compared with 31% of students who took the questionnaires and had the diagnostic interviews but did not participate in the workshop (p < .03).
In another study, results of the short self-report LIFE measures of depression showed that the students in the intervention group had significantly lower levels of depression compared with students who took the questionnaires and had diagnostic interviews but did not participate in the workshop. Effect size for this finding was large (Cohen's d = 0.50).
|
|
Studies Measuring Outcome
|
Study 1, Study 2
|
|
Study Designs
|
Experimental
|
|
Quality of Research Rating
|
3.5
(0.0-4.0 scale)
|
| Outcome 2: Episodes of anxiety |
|
Description of Measures
|
The Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-III-R (SCID) was used as a diagnostic interview for episodes of anxiety at the preworkshop phase of the study. At subsequent interviews, the Longitudinal Interval Follow-Up Evaluation (LIFE), modified to reflect DSM-III-R criteria, was used. The LIFE assesses generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) on a 1-3 scale. A rating of 2 is considered moderate, and a rating of 3 is definite GAD. The program used a cutoff score of 2 or more for a diagnosis of GAD. One study used a short, self-report version of LIFE to determine which participants might be having current episodes of anxiety. This instrument included eight yes/no questions pertaining to anxiety, yielding a score of 0 to 8 (low score indicating a low level of anxiety).
|
|
Key Findings
|
In one study, 14% of students in the intervention group had episodes of anxiety at moderate level or above, compared with 21% of students who took the questionnaires and had the diagnostic interviews but did not participate in the workshop (p < .04). Students in the comparison group were 1.6 times more likely than students in the intervention group to have an anxiety episode.
There were no significant findings relating to episodes of anxiety in another study.
|
|
Studies Measuring Outcome
|
Study 1, Study 2
|
|
Study Designs
|
Experimental
|
|
Quality of Research Rating
|
3.5
(0.0-4.0 scale)
|
| Outcome 3: Symptoms of depression |
|
Description of Measures
|
Symptoms of depression were assessed using: (1) the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), a 21-item self-report questionnaire to measure depressive symptoms; and (2) the Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (SIGH-D), a 7-item clinician-rated structured interview.
|
|
Key Findings
|
In one study, students in the intervention group had significantly fewer depressive symptoms (based on self-report only) compared with students who took the questionnaires and had the diagnostic interviews but did not participate in the workshop. Effect size for this finding was medium (Cohen's d = 0.29).
In another study, results of the BDI indicated that students in the intervention group had significantly fewer symptoms of depression compared with students who took the questionnaires and had diagnostic interviews but did not participate in the workshop. Effect size for this finding was large (Cohen's d = 0.59).
|
|
Studies Measuring Outcome
|
Study 1, Study 2
|
|
Study Designs
|
Experimental
|
|
Quality of Research Rating
|
3.3
(0.0-4.0 scale)
|
| Outcome 4: Symptoms of anxiety |
|
Description of Measures
|
Symptoms of anxiety were assessed using: (1) the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), a 21-item self-report questionnaire to measure anxiety symptoms; and (2) the Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (SIGH-A), a 14-item clinician-rated structured interview.
|
|
Key Findings
|
In one study, students in the intervention group had significantly fewer anxiety symptoms (based on self-report only) compared with students who took the questionnaires and had the diagnostic interviews but did not participate in the workshop. Effect size for this finding was small (Cohen's d = 0.24).
In another study, results of the BAI indicated that students in the intervention group had significantly fewer symptoms of anxiety compared with students who took the questionnaires and had diagnostic interviews but did not receive the workshop. Effect size for this finding was large (Cohen's d = 0.43).
|
|
Studies Measuring Outcome
|
Study 1, Study 2
|
|
Study Designs
|
Experimental
|
|
Quality of Research Rating
|
3.3
(0.0-4.0 scale)
|
Study Populations
The following populations were identified in the studies reviewed for Quality of
Research.
|
Study
|
Age
|
Gender
|
Race/Ethnicity
|
|
Study 1
|
18-25 (Young adult)
|
52% Female
48% Male
|
Data not reported/available
|
|
Study 2
|
18-25 (Young adult)
|
65% Female
35% Male
|
Data not reported/available
|
Quality of Research Ratings by Criteria (0.0-4.0 scale)
External reviewers independently evaluate the Quality of Research for an intervention's
reported results using six criteria:
For more information about these criteria and the meaning of the ratings, see Quality of Research.
|
Outcome
|
Reliability
of Measures
|
Validity
of Measures
|
Fidelity
|
Missing
Data/Attrition
|
Confounding
Variables
|
Data
Analysis
|
Overall
Rating
|
|
1: Episodes of depression
|
4.0
|
4.0
|
3.3
|
3.3
|
2.3
|
4.0
|
3.5
|
|
2: Episodes of anxiety
|
4.0
|
4.0
|
3.3
|
3.3
|
2.3
|
4.0
|
3.5
|
|
3: Symptoms of depression
|
3.5
|
3.5
|
3.3
|
3.3
|
2.3
|
4.0
|
3.3
|
|
4: Symptoms of anxiety
|
3.5
|
3.5
|
3.3
|
3.3
|
2.3
|
4.0
|
3.3
|
Study Strengths The studies were well constructed and well implemented, using good experimental design. The studies used standardized outcome measures with good reliability and validity. Attrition rates for participants enrolled in both studies were low. Intervention fidelity was well monitored, and experienced therapists were used. A detailed manual was used to standardize the workshops. Additional training was given to therapists before intervention, with frequent supervision thereafter. Stratified randomization for group assignment was used, and interviewers were blinded to participants' assigned condition. Both studies used appropriate statistical analyses.
Study Weaknesses No information was available on the psychometric properties for the shortened version of the LIFE instrument used in one study. The study design lacked a placebo control; this can be a confounding factor in interpreting study results. The sampling method showed a low response rate for participant recruitment, and the intervention group participants were aware of their group assignment. These factors compromise the external validity and generalizability of findings of both studies.
|
|
Readiness for Dissemination
Materials Reviewed
The materials below were reviewed for Readiness for Dissemination. The implementation
point of contact can provide information regarding implementation of the intervention
and the availability of additional, updated, or new materials.
Buchanan, G., Gardenswartz, C., & Seligman, M. (1999). Physical health following a cognitive-behavioral intervention. Prevention & Treatment, 2(10). Horowitz, J. L., & Garber, J. (2006). The prevention of depressive symptoms in children and adolescents: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 74(3), 401-415. Positive Psychology Center Web site, http://www.ppc.sas.upenn.edu Reivich, K., & Shatte, A. (2003). Penn Resilience Training for college students: Leader's guide. Reivich, K. & Shatte, A. (2003). Penn Resilience Training for college students: Participant's guide. Seligman, M. E., Schulman, P., DeRubeis, R. J., & Hollon, S. D. (1999). The prevention of depression and anxiety. Prevention and Treatment, 2(8) [Serial online]. Seligman, M. E., Schulman, P., & Tryon, A. M. (2007). Group prevention of depression and anxiety symptoms. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 45(6), 1111-1126. University of Pennsylvania. (2003). Resilience training for college students [PowerPoint presentation].
Readiness for Dissemination Ratings by Criteria (0.0-4.0 scale)
External reviewers independently evaluate the intervention's Readiness for Dissemination
using three criteria:
- Availability of implementation materials
- Availability of training and support resources
- Availability of quality assurance procedures
For more information about these criteria and the meaning of the ratings, see Readiness for Dissemination.
Implementation
Materials
|
Training and Support
Resources
|
Quality Assurance
Procedures
|
Overall
Rating
|
|
3.5
|
2.8
|
3.0
|
3.1
|
Dissemination Strengths The program curriculum is detailed in high-quality leader and participant guides. Both guides are fairly easy to follow, clearly presented, and age and gender appropriate. The leader guide can be used for training purposes. Support resources are available to potential implementers. Outcome and fidelity measurement using well-established instruments is carefully described in available published and unpublished research materials.
Dissemination Weaknesses Limited information is provided on organizational-level implementation. Little information is provided on identifying and recruiting participants. It is unclear how leaders obtain training from the program's developers and what the training involves. The program materials do not address quality assurance outside the research context.
|
|
Costs
The cost information below was provided by the developer. Although this cost information
may have been updated by the developer since the time of review, it may not reflect
the current costs or availability of items (including newly developed or discontinued
items). The implementation point of contact can provide current information and
discuss implementation requirements.
|
Item Description
|
Cost
|
Required by Developer
|
|
Participant guide
|
Free
|
Yes
|
|
Trainer guide
|
Free
|
Yes
|
|
Training, technical assistance/consultation, and quality assurance materials
|
Contact the developer
|
Contact the developer
|
|
Replications
Selected citations are presented below. An asterisk indicates that the document
was reviewed for Quality of Research.
* Seligman, M. E., Schulman, P., DeRubeis, R. J., & Hollon, S. D. (1999). The prevention of depression and anxiety. Prevention and Treatment, 2(8) [Serial online]. URL: http://www.journals.apa.org/prevention/volume2/pre0020008a.html
* Seligman, M. E., Schulman, P., & Tryon, A. M. (2007). Group prevention of depression and anxiety symptoms. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 45(6), 1111-1126.
|
|
|
