↓ Skip to main content

The Prevention of Child and Adolescent Anxiety: A Meta-analytic Review

Overview of attention for article published in Prevention Science, March 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
111 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
185 Mendeley
Title
The Prevention of Child and Adolescent Anxiety: A Meta-analytic Review
Published in
Prevention Science, March 2011
DOI 10.1007/s11121-011-0210-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brian J. Fisak, Dan Richard, Angela Mann

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to provide a comprehensive review of the effectiveness of child and adolescent anxiety prevention programs. Mean weighted effect sizes were calculated, and studies were encoded for potential moderator variables. A statistically significant effect size of .18 was obtained at post-intervention, which is consistent with effect sizes reported in reviews of depression, eating disorder, and substance abuse prevention programs. However, the effect sizes obtained at follow-up yielded mixed results. Significant moderators of program effectiveness were found including provider type (professional versus lay provider) and the use of the FRIENDS program. In contrast, program duration, participant age, gender, and program type (universal versus targeted) were not found to moderate program effectiveness. Clinical implications and directions for future research are discussed, including the need for more long-term follow-up, early prevention programs, and studies that systematically examine the impact of parent involvement on program effectiveness.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 185 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Spain 3 2%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Italy 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Unknown 172 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 42 23%
Student > Doctoral Student 31 17%
Researcher 26 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 12%
Student > Bachelor 15 8%
Other 48 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 99 54%
Unspecified 29 16%
Social Sciences 22 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 3%
Other 12 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 September 2017.
All research outputs
#764,143
of 12,342,754 outputs
Outputs from Prevention Science
#55
of 658 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,952
of 224,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Prevention Science
#4
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,342,754 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 658 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 224,949 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.