Alimenté par : Claudia (ADFI Alsace)
Cet outil s'appuie sur PubMind
PubMind est une plateforme collaborative de veille scientifique qui permet d'importer des publications depuis PubMed, de suivre leur avancement de lecture, d'en extraire les éléments méthodologiques clés (protocoles, variables, résultats) et de constituer une synthèse structurée afin de faciliter la réalisation de revues de littérature. Entièrement personnalisable, cet outil s'adapte aux thématiques de recherche de ses utilisateurs.
Nous l'avons configuré ici pour centraliser et analyser la littérature scientifique concernant les croyances, les traitements psychologiques, l'étude de la scrupulosité, ainsi que l'impact et la prise en charge des troubles liés aux dérives sectaires.
Dernière synchronisation le 05/06/2026
Children (Basel) . 2026;13 (5)
Youth mental health has become a global public health priority, with psychological distress, anxiety, and depressive symptoms increasing sharply over the last decade. Numerous interventions, ranging from mindfulness-based and cognitive behavioral programs to digital applications and peer-support initiatives, have been evaluated through meta-analytic reviews. However, the cumulative evidence remains heterogeneous and dispersed across intervention modalities. The present umbrella meta-analysis synthesized existing meta-analyses on psychological and digital interventions for adolescents and young adults, adopting a Bayesian random-effects framework to quantify the overall effectiveness and heterogeneity of outcomes. Systematic searches were conducted in PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science up to September 2025, using the following syntax: ("meta-analysis" OR "systematic review") AND (adolescent* OR "youth" OR "young people") AND ("mental health" OR "well-being" OR "psychological intervention"). Eligible reviews reported standardized mean differences (Hedges' ) or convertible statistics and targeted mental health or well-being outcomes. Effect sizes were standardized using Hedges' and synthesized under a random-effects framework. They were then pooled using Bayesian random-effects modeling with a Normal (0, 0.5) prior on the grand mean μ and a half-Cauchy (0, 0.5) prior on the heterogeneity variance . Nine eligible meta-analyses ( = 9 aggregated effects, ≈1150 primary studies) met the inclusion criteria. The posterior mean standardized effect was = 0.229 (95% CrI [0.157, 0.301]), indicating a small but credible positive impact of interventions on youth mental health and well-being indicators ( = 0.19 for symptom reduction; = 0.28 for positive well-being). Between-study heterogeneity was non-negligible ( = 0.003; posterior mean = 23%, 95% CrI [0.04%, 74%]), reflecting uncertainty about the true degree of variability across modalities and settings. The posterior probability that > 0 was >0.999, providing strong Bayesian evidence for credible but heterogeneous effects. The findings suggest potentially credible but heterogeneous effects of psychological and digital interventions on youth mental health and well-being outcomes, although the magnitude and consistency of these effects remain constrained by substantial heterogeneity and the breadth of aggregated outcome constructs. Results should be interpreted with appropriate caution.