医学
随机对照试验
荟萃分析
心理干预
观察研究
萧条(经济学)
置信区间
心理信息
相对风险
出版偏见
梅德林
严格标准化平均差
系统回顾
社会支持
精神科
内科学
心理学
心理治疗师
政治学
法学
经济
宏观经济学
作者
Henar Campos-Paíno,Patricia Moreno-Peral,Irene Gómez-Gómez,Sonia Conejo-Cerón,Santiago Galán,Sara Reyes-Martín,Juan Ángel Bellón Saameño
标识
DOI:10.1177/00207640221134232
摘要
Background: The evidence available on the association between social support and prevention of depression has been basically obtained from observational studies. Aim: We evaluated the effectiveness of social support-based interventions for the prevention of depression in people without clinical depression. Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis (SR/MA) of randomized controlled trials (RCT), which were searched for in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, WOS, PsycINFO, OpenGrey and other sources from the inception dates to June 8, 2022. We selected RCTs that assessed the effectiveness of social support-based interventions as compared to controls, included subjects without baseline clinical depression, and measured as results a reduction in depressive symptoms and/or the incidence of new cases of depression. Pooled standardized mean differences (SMDs) were calculated from random effects models. Results: Nine RCTs involving 927 patients from North America, Asia and Europe were included. The pooled SMD was −0.43 [95% confidence interval (CI) −0.82 to −0.04; p = .031]. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of results. Heterogeneity was substantial [ I 2 = 80% (95% CI: 64% to 89%)]. A meta-regression model that included usual care as comparator and the continent (Europe), explained 53% of heterogeneity. Eight RCTs had a moderate overall risk of bias and one had a high risk of bias. Follow-up was ⩾1 year in only three RCTs. There was no statistical evidence of publication bias. The quality of evidence, as measured on GRADE guidelines, was low. Conclusion: Social support-based interventions had a small preventive effect on depression. Longer RCTs with a low risk of bias are necessary.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI