Evidence Hub

The Effectiveness of Modular Transdiagnostic Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Versus Treatment as Usual for Youths Displaying School Attendance Problems: A Randomized Controlled Trial

D. Johnsen, J. Lomholt, David Heyne, M. B. Jensen, Pia Jeppesen, W. K. Silverman, M. Thastum

Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology, 2024

78 participants · 22 citations

Abstract

School attendance problems (SAPs) are associated with negative short- and long-term outcomes. Despite high prevalence of SAPs, there is a shortage of evidence-based interventions. Existing approaches often target either school refusal or truancy, leaving a gap in effective interventions addressing both types of SAPs. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) assessed the effectiveness of Back2School (B2S), a modular transdiagnostic cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for SAPs, compared to treatment as usual (TAU). Outcomes included youths’ school attendance and mental health. A group (B2S, TAU) × time (Pre, Post, 3-Month Follow-Up) design involving 152 youths (B2S; n = 74, TAU; n = 78) with SAPs (i.e., ≥ 10% absence in the past three months), aged 6–16 years (M = 12.2, SD = 2.2, males = 60%) were used. B2S comprised three months of CBT with youths, parents, and school involvement, while TAU comprised public and/or private intervention services. On average, youths in B2S received 15.0, (SD = 3.9) hours of intervention, while those in TAU received 13.4, (SD = 21.6). Intervention effects were investigated using mixed linear models. Both B2S and TAU exhibited significant within-group improvements in school attendance, with no significant differences between them. However, the B2S group significantly outperformed TAU in reducing youths’ emotional problems, conduct problems, problems with peers, the overall impact of problems, and increasing youths self-efficacy for attending school…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 78 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free