Changing school climates to promote adolescent wellbeing: two trials with one goal (original) (raw)
Related papers
Clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health : CP & EMH, 2015
The acquisition of social and emotional skills is associated with positive youth development, character education, healthy lifestyle behaviours, reduction in depression and anxiety, conduct disorders, violence, bullying, conflict, and anger. School-based interventions aimed to enhance these skills go beyond a problem-focused approach to embrace a more positive view of health; they could also improve the youth's wellbeing. To describe the main features and to establish the effectiveness of universal school-based RCTs for children and the youth, aimed to promote their psychosocial wellbeing, positive development, healthy lifestyle behaviours and/or academic performance by improving their emotional and social skills. Systematic review by searching for relevant papers in PubMed/Medline with the following key words: "mental health" OR "wellbeing" OR "health promotion" OR "emotional learning" OR "social learning" OR "emotional and...
Public Health Research (NIHR), 2013
Background In contrast to curriculum-based health education interventions in schools, the school environment approach promotes health by modifying schools’ physical/social environment. This systematic review reports on the health effects of the school environment and processes by which these might occur. It includes theories, intervention outcome and process evaluations, quantitative studies and qualitative studies. Research questions Research question (RQ)1: What theories are used to inform school environment interventions or explain school-level health influences? What testable hypotheses are suggested? RQ2: What are the effects on student health/inequalities of school environment interventions addressing organisation/management; teaching/pastoral care/discipline; and the physical environment? What are the costs? RQ3: How feasible/acceptable and context dependent are such interventions? RQ4: What are the effects on student health/inequalities of school-level measures of organisation/management; teaching/pastoral care/discipline; and the physical environment? RQ5: Through what processes might such influences occur? Data sources A total of 16 databases were searched between 30 July 2010 and 23 September 2010 to identify relevant studies, including the British Educational Index, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Health Management Information Consortium, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO. In addition, references of included studies were checked and authors contacted. Review methods In stage 1, we mapped references concerning how the school environment affects health and consulted stakeholders to identify stage 2 priorities. In stage 2, we undertook five reviews corresponding to our RQs. Results Stage 1: A total of 82,775 references were retrieved and 1144 were descriptively mapped. Stage 2: A total of 24 theories were identified (RQ1). The human functioning and school organisation, social capital and social development theories were judged most useful. Ten outcome evaluations were included (RQ2). Four US randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and one UK quasi-experimental study examined interventions building school community/relationships. Studies reported benefits for some, but not all outcomes (e.g. aggression, conflict resolution, emotional health). Two US RCTs assessed interventions empowering students to contribute to modifying food/physical activity environments, reporting benefits for physical activity but not for diet. Three UK quasi-experimental evaluations examined playground improvements, reporting mixed findings, with benefits being greater for younger children and longer break times. Six process evaluations (RQ3) reported positively. One study suggested that implementation was facilitated when this built on existing ethos and when senior staff were supportive. We reviewed 42 multilevel studies, confining narrative synthesis to 10 that appropriately adjusted for confounders. Four UK/US reports suggested that schools with higher value-added attainment/attendance had lower rates of substance use and fighting. Three reports from different countries examined school policies on smoking/alcohol, with mixed results. One US study found that schools with more unobservable/unsupervised places reported increased substance use. Another US study reported that school size, age structure and staffing ratio did not correlate with student drinking. Twenty-one qualitative reports from different countries (RQ5) suggested that disengagement, lack of safety and lack of participation in decisions may predispose students to engage in health risks. Limitations We found no evidence regarding health inequalities or cost, and could not undertake meta-analysis. Conclusions There is non-definitive evidence for the feasibility and effectiveness of school environment interventions involving community/relationship building, empowering student participation in modifying schools’ food/physical activity environments, and playground improvements. Multilevel studies suggest that schools that add value educationally may promote student health. Qualitative studies suggest pathways underlying these effects. This evidence lends broad support to theories of social development, social capital and human functioning and school organisation. Further trials to examine the effects of school environment modifications on student health are recommended. Funding The National Institute for Health Research Public Health Research programme.
BMC Public Health, 2011
Background: Schools may have important effects on students' and staff's health. Rather than treating schools merely as sites for health education, 'school-environment' interventions treat schools as settings which influence health. Evidence concerning the effects of such interventions has not been recently synthesised. Methods/design: Systematic review aiming to map and synthesise evidence on what theories and conceptual frameworks are most commonly used to inform school-environment interventions or explain school-level influences on health; what effects school-environment interventions have on health/health inequalities; how feasible and acceptable are school-environment interventions; what effects other school-level factors have on health; and through what processes school-level influences affect health. We will examine interventions aiming to promote health by modifying schools' physical, social or cultural environment via actions focused on school policies and practices relating to education, pastoral care and other aspects of schools beyond merely providing health education. Participants are staff and students age 4-18 years. We will review published research unrestricted by language, year or source. Searching will involve electronic databases including Embase, ERIC, PubMed, PsycInfo and Social Science Citation Index using natural-language phrases plus reference/citation checking. Stage 1 will map studies descriptively by focus and methods. Stage 2 will involve additional inclusion criteria, quality assessment and data extraction undertaken by two reviewers in parallel. Evidence will be synthesised narratively and statistically where appropriate (undertaking subgroup analyses and meta-regression and where no significant heterogeneity of effect sizes is found, pooling these to calculate a final effect size). Discussion: We anticipate: finding a large number of studies missed by previous reviews; that non-intervention studies of school effects examine a greater breadth of determinants than are addressed by intervention studies; and that intervention effect estimates are greater than for school-based health curriculum interventions without school-environment components.
Journal of Adolescent Health, 2021
Adolescence encompasses a critical developmental phase, which fosters or hinders psychological, physical, and social health. Whole-school interventions take a universal approach in targeting the entire school environment ("school climate") to improve adolescent outcomes; however, little is known about the mediating role of school climate on these effects. Methods: Our study (N ¼ 5,539) was situated within the Strengthening Evidence base on scHoolbased intErventions for pRomoting randomized controlled trial, which demonstrated the effectiveness of a lay counseloredelivered school intervention among secondary school students in Bihar, India. We examined the potential mediating role of school climate and its subcomponents (relationships at school, sense of belonging, commitment to academic achievement, and participation in school events) at 8 months postrandomization of the Strengthening Evidence base on scHool-based intErventions for pRomoting intervention on longer term adolescent health outcomes (depressive symptoms, experiences of bullying, and perpetration of violence) at 17 months postrandomization. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02484014). Results: School climate mediated the effects of the intervention on all three outcomes of interest. A nurturing school environment, characterized by supportive and engaged relationships with teachers and peers, a sense of belonging, and active participation in school climate predicted lower rates of depressive symptoms, experiences of bullying, and perpetration of violence. Noteworthy, it was the quality of these relationships, rather than the commitment to learning, which was most predictive of outcomes. Conclusion: Educational policies should consider bolstering the school's social environment to directly impact adolescent health and well-being.
BMC Public Health
Background The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the normality of daily life for many children, their families, and schools, resulting in heightened levels of anxiety, depression, social isolation, and loneliness among young people. An integrated public health model of interventions is needed to address the problem and to safeguard the mental health and wellbeing of children. The Triple P – Positive Parenting Program is one system of parenting support with a strong evidence-base and wide international reach. When implemented as a public health approach, Triple P has demonstrated population level positive effects on child wellbeing. This study will be the first large-scale, multi-site randomised controlled trial of a newly developed, low-intensity variant of Triple P, a school-based seminar series, as a response to the impacts of the pandemic. Methods The evaluation will employ an Incomplete Batched Stepped Wedge Cluster Randomised Trial Design. At least 300 Australian primary schools, fro...
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
BackgroundInterventions to modify school environments are effective in promoting young people’s health across outcomes, but mechanisms are poorly understood. We assessed mediation in a trial of the Learning Together intervention, building on the recent publication of results of effectiveness for reducing bullying and benefits across secondary outcomes and generally good implementation fidelity.MethodsWithin a cluster-randomised trial involving 40 English schools, we examined student-reported and staff-reported school climate and student-reported involvement with delinquent peers at 24-month and 36-month follow-up, assessing the reliability of measures and whether these mediated health outcomes at a final follow-up.ResultsResponse rates and reliability were good for student-reported but not staff-reported measures. The intervention increased student-reported but not staff-reported-positive school climate but, like effects on student health outcomes, these manifested only at a final f...
Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 2017
We aimed to investigate whether the Good School Toolkit reduced emotional violence, severe physical violence, sexual violence and injuries from school staff to students, as well as emotional, physical and sexual violence between peers, in Ugandan primary schools. We performed a two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial with parallel assignment. Forty-two schools in one district were allocated to intervention (n = 21) or wait-list control (n = 21) arms in 2012. We did cross-sectional baseline and endline surveys in 2012 and 2014, and the Good School Toolkit intervention was implemented for 18 months between surveys. Analyses were by intention to treat and are adjusted for clustering within schools and for baseline school-level proportions of outcomes. The Toolkit was associated with an overall reduction in any form of violence from staff and/or peers in the past week towards both male (aOR = 0.34, 95%CI 0.22-0.53) and female students (aOR = 0.55, 95%CI 0.36-0.84). Injuries as a res...
BMJ Open, 2020
BackgroundWe have previously reported benefits for reduced bullying, smoking, alcohol and other drug use and mental health from a trial of ‘Learning Together’, an intervention that aimed to modify school environments and implement restorative practice and a social and emotional skill curriculum.ObjectivesTo conduct post hoc theory-driven analyses of broader impacts.DesignCluster randomised trial.Settings40 state secondary schools in southern England.ParticipantsStudents aged 11/12 years at baseline.OutcomesStudent self-reported measures at 24 and 36 months of: cyberbullying victimisation and perpetration; observations of other students perpetrating aggressive behaviours at school; own perpetration of aggressive behaviours in and outside school; perceived lack of safety at school; participation in school disciplinary procedures; truancy and e-cigarette use.ResultsWe found evidence of multiple impacts on other health (reduced e-cigarette use, cyberbullying perpetration, perpetration o...