Innovations in Practice: <scp>CUES</scp>‐Ed: an in‐service evaluation of a new universal cognitive behavioural early mental health intervention programme for primary school children

Redfern, Anna; Jolley, Suzanne; Bracegirdle, Karen; Browning, Sophie; Plant, Debbie

doi:10.1111/camh.12309

Cited by 7 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As briefly reviewed here, there have been various but similar models suggesting the components or factors of school health, thus, the question is if there are instruments to measure these factors. Measuring the factors of school health is important; it helps the health specials, school nurses, school principals, teachers, parents, politicians, and other stakeholders to realize what they need to improve in order to effectively promote student health, which in turn leads to better educational outcomes ( Best, Oppewal & Travers, 2018 ; Rahman et al, 2018 ) promotes public health ( Kolbe, 2019 ; Birch & Auld, 2019 ), improves mental health ( Deborah, 2019 ; Redfern et al, 2019 ; Holt, 2020 ), increases health equity ( Peng et al, 2019 ; Gonzĺez, Etow & De La Vega, 2019 ), promotes general health ( Boroumandfar et al, 2015 ; Krok-Schoen et al, 2018 ; Mishra et al, 2018 ), prevents diseases ( Akihiro et al, 2017 ; Park et al, 2017 ; Jihene et al, 2015 ), promotes physical activities ( Kelly et al, 2019 ; Dai, 2019 ), healthier nutritional choices ( Anita, 2019 ; Shrestha et al, 2019 ), and increases student’s safety ( Voon & Ariff, 2019 ; Chalupka & Anderko, 2019 ; Mannathoko, 2019 ), among many other benefits.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

School health assessment tools: a systematic review of measurement in primary schools

Kazemitabar

Moghadamzadeh

Habibi

et al. 2020

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This systematic review aimed to investigate the psychometric properties of the school health’s assessment tools in primary schools through COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. We examined the studies that have addressed the measurement properties of school-health instruments to give a clear overview of the quality of all available tools measuring school health in primary schools. This systematic review was registered in PROPERO with the Registration ID: CRD42020158158. Method Databases of EBSCOhost, PubMed, ProQuest, Wily, PROSPERO, and OpenGrey were systematically searched without any time limitation to find all full-text English journal articles studied at least one of the COSMIN checklist measurement properties of a school-health assessment tool in primary schools. The instruments should be constructed based on a school health model. The eligible studies were assessed by COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist to report their quality of methodology for each measurement property and for the whole study by rating high, moderate or low quality. Results At the final screening just seven studies remained for review. Four studies were tool development, three of them were rated as “adequate” and the other study as “very good”; five studies examined the content validity, three of them were appraised as “very good”, and the two remaining as “inadequate”. All seven studies measured structural validity, three of them were evaluated as “very good”, three other were scored as “adequate”, and the last study as “inadequate”. All the seven studies investigated the internal consistency, five of them were assessed as “very good”, one was rated as “doubtful”, and the last one as “inadequate”. Just one study examined the cross-cultural validity and was rated as “adequate”. Finally, all seven studies measured reliability, two of them were rated as “very good” and the rest five studies were appraised as “doubtful”. All rating was based on COSMIN checklist criteria for quality of measurement properties assessment. Conclusion The number of studies addressing school health assessment tools was very low and therefore not sufficient. Hence, there is a serious need to investigate the psychometric properties of the available instruments measuring school health at primary schools. Moreover, the studies included in the present systematic review did not fulfill all the criteria of the COSMIN checklist for assessing measurement properties. We suggest that future studies consider these criteria for measuring psychometric properties and developing school health assessment tools.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

School health assessment tools: a systematic review of measurement in primary schools

Kazemitabar

Moghadamzadeh

Habibi

et al. 2020

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This suggests that early intervention to improve these cognitive processes in younger children may be useful at a population level. This could be incorporated into social and emotional well-being curricula via existing mental health promotion programmes in primary schools [47] in collaboration with funders, teachers and parents. For older adolescents seeking help for distressing PLEs, general psychopathology (i.e.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distressing psychotic-like experiences, cognitive functioning and early developmental markers in clinically referred young people aged 8–18 years

Barnes

Stewart

Browning

et al. 2021

Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Neurocognitive difficulties and early childhood speech/motor delays are well documented amongst older adolescents and young adults considered at risk for psychosis-spectrum diagnoses. We aimed to test associations between unusual or psychotic-like experiences (PLEs), co-occurring distress/emotional symptoms, current cognitive functioning and developmental delays/difficulties in young people (aged 8–18 years) referred to Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services in South London, UK. Methods Study 1 examined receptive language, verbal learning and caregiver-reported speech and motor delays/difficulties in a sample of 101 clinically-referred children aged 8–14 years, comparing those reporting no PLEs (n = 19), PLEs without distress (n = 16), and PLEs with distress (n = 66). Study 2 tested associations of severity of distressing PLEs with vocabulary, perceptual reasoning, word reading and developmental delays/difficulties in a second sample of 122 adolescents aged 12–18 years with distressing PLEs. Results In Study 1, children with distressing PLEs had lower receptive language and delayed recall and higher rates of developmental delays/difficulties than the no-PLE and non-distressing PLE groups (F values: 2.3–2.8; p values: < 0.005). Receptive language (β = 0.24, p = 0.03) and delayed recall (β = − 0.17, p = 0.02) predicted PLE distress severity. In Study 2, the cognitive-developmental variables did not significantly predict PLE distress severity (β values = 0.01–0.22, p values: > 0.05). Conclusion Findings may be consistent with a cognitive-developmental model relating distressing PLEs in youth with difficulties in cognitive functioning. This highlights the potential utility of adjunctive cognitive strategies which target mechanisms associated with PLE distress. These could be included in cognitive-behavioural interventions offered prior to the development of an at-risk mental state in mental health, educational or public health settings.

show abstract

“…UK government reports for England suggest higher rates, increasing since 2017 from 10 to 16% [ 4 ]. In our recent work, nearly half of 7–10-year olds in London were ‘vulnerable’, herein defined as self-reporting emotional/behavioural problems at levels typical of clinical populations [ 5 , 6 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The CUES for schools programme aims to address this need, as a teacher-facilitated, interactive digital platform version of the mental health professional face-to-face delivered CUES-Ed intervention, a cognitive-behavioural whole class approach for 7–10-year olds [ 5 , 6 ]. CUES is not an acronym in this context; it references the programme content concerning noticing cues to our own emotional state.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A cluster randomised, 16-week, parallel-group multicentre trial to compare the effectiveness of a digital school-based cognitive behavioural resilience/wellbeing-building intervention targeting emotional and behavioural problems in vulnerable Year 4 primary school children in whole classes, to the usual school curriculum: a study protocol to the “CUES for Schools” trial

Jolley

Lord

Plant

et al. 2023

Trials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Around 10% of school-aged children experience mental health difficulties. Many more are ‘vulnerable’: experiencing emotional and/or behavioural problems reaching clinical levels, and thus at greatest risk of future mental illness. The trial aim is to evaluate the effectiveness of the CUES for schools programme in reducing emotional and behavioural problems in vulnerable children. Methods The “CUES for Schools” study is a multicentre cluster randomised controlled trial in primary schools in south east England. Schools will be randomised to receive the usual school curriculum, or the CUES programme (1:1). We aim to enrol 74 schools (5550 children including 2220 vulnerable children). CUES is a whole-class teacher-facilitated interactive digital cognitive-behavioural intervention, delivered as 24 short (20-min) modules over 12 weeks, targeting emotional/behavioural regulation skills. Children self-report emotional/behavioural problems at baseline, 8, and 16 weeks, and wellbeing and cognitive vulnerability at 0 and 16 weeks. Adverse events are assessed at 8 and 16 weeks. Teachers rate classroom behaviour at baseline and 16 weeks. School senior leadership teams and individual teachers consent to involvement in the study; parents can opt their child out of CUES sessions, assessments, or research. Children can similarly opt out and assent to research participation. The primary objective of this trial is to evaluate the effectiveness of CUES for schools compared to the usual school curriculum in improving emotional/behavioural problems for vulnerable Year 4 (8–9 years old) children at 16 weeks post-randomisation, as measured using a standardised questionnaire designed for primary schools. The secondary objective is to investigate the impact of the CUES for schools programme on both vulnerable and non-vulnerable children on wellbeing and teacher-rated classroom behaviour. Discussion The study will show whether CUES for schools is more effective than the usual curriculum in reducing emotional and behavioural problems in vulnerable Year 4 children, and thus reducing the risk of mental health difficulties in later adolescent and adult life. As a digital, teacher-facilitated intervention, CUES for schools can be readily implemented, at minimal cost. If effective, CUES for schools therefore has the potential to reduce the impact of emotional/behavioural difficulties on children’s learning, behaviour, and relationships and the burden of future mental health morbidity. Trial registration Trial Registration ISRCTN11445338. Registered on September 12, 2022.

show abstract

Innovations in Practice: CUES‐Ed: an in‐service evaluation of a new universal cognitive behavioural early mental health intervention programme for primary school children

Cited by 7 publications

References 11 publications

School health assessment tools: a systematic review of measurement in primary schools

School health assessment tools: a systematic review of measurement in primary schools

Distressing psychotic-like experiences, cognitive functioning and early developmental markers in clinically referred young people aged 8–18 years

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About