Background: The Psychosocial Index (PSI) is a self-rating scale based on clinimetric principles that is simple to use in a busy clinical setting. It can be integrated by observer-rated clinical judgment, providing a first-line, comprehensive assessment of stress, well-being, distress, illness behavior, and quality of life. By calculation of scores, it can be used for conventional psychological measurements. Its clinical applications and clinimetric properties are reviewed. The present version of the PSI has been slightly revised. In addition, a modified version for use in adolescents and young adults (PSI-Young; PSI-Y) is also included. Methods: Articles that involved the use of the PSI were identified by searching the Web of Science database from 1998 to February 2016 and by a manual search of the literature. Results: A total of 20 studies reporting results from the use of PSI were included. The PSI has been employed in various clinical populations in different countries and showed high sensitivity. It significantly discriminated varying degrees of psychosocial impairment in different populations. When subjects were identified by categorical criteria (presence of allostatic overload, psychosomatic syndromes, psychiatric disorders), the PSI scores were significantly different across subgroups. Conclusions: In clinical practice, scanning the list of symptoms allows clinicians to assess rapidly which symptoms and problems are perceived as most troublesome. In research settings, the use of scores makes the PSI a valid and sensitive tool in differentiating levels of psychosocial variables among groups.

IMPORTANCE Sexual and physical dating violence is prevalent among adolescents and is associated with adverse health effects.OBJECTIVE To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials to assess the efficacy of prevention programs for sexual and physical dating violence in adolescents.DATA SOURCES Search terms were combined for dating violence, adolescents, and randomized clinical trials in PsycINFO/Eric/PsycArticles, PubMed, and Web of Science databases from inception through April 2021.STUDY SELECTION Included studies had a randomized design of any type examining the efficacy of an intervention to reduce dating violence among adolescents and provided at least 1 measure of sexual or physical dating violence. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESISData extraction coded characteristics of trials, participants, and interventions and assessed risk of bias using the Revised Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias tool. Outcomes were pooled using a random-effects model. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses were performed to explore the target population and intervention factors associated with positive outcomes. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe odds ratio (OR) was calculated for 3 different outcomes:(1) sexual dating violence, (2) physical dating violence, and (3) composite measures of sexual and physical dating violence. For each outcome, separate analyses were conducted for survivorship and perpetration scores. We also combined the scores of physical/sexual violence and perpetration/survivorship of teen dating violence into a single composite overall outcome including all studies.RESULTS Eighteen trials (22 781 adolescents) were included. Overall, interventions were associated with reduced physical and sexual dating violence (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.69-0.89; P < .001). Separate analyses further indicated that this association was significant for physical violence perpetration (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.59-0.92; P = .01) and survivorship (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64-0.95; P = .01). For sexual violence, the association was not statistically significant. Exploratory subgroup analyses revealed that trials targeting at-risk youth, older adolescents (age >15 years), and trials involving parents in the intervention reported significantly larger effect sizes. Meta-regression analyses did not show any significant associations between intervention effect sizes and length or intensity of the programs. Publication bias was observed, but the adjusted ORs remained significant. Three studies reported iatrogenic associations. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEFindings from this study suggest that prevention programs may be effective in reducing physical teen dating violence, but there is unclear evidence of the effect on sexual violence outcomes. Further research assessing the active ingredients of interventions, especially in the area of sexual dating violence, is warranted.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract