Skip to content

Transforming Adolescent Mental Health Through Accessible, Scalable, Technology-supported Small-group Instruction

Transforming Adolescent Mental Health Through Accessible, Scalable, Technology-supported Small-group Instruction

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05860257
Enrollment
1200
Registered
2023-05-16
Start date
2023-09-01
Completion date
2027-06-15
Last updated
2025-10-03

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Anxiety Depression, Suicidal Ideation

Brief summary

Adolescence is a developmental period of significant risk for anxiety, depressive symptoms, and suicidality, and the investigators propose to target key peer-based risk and protective factors using Cooperative Learning (CL). CL is a small-group instructional approach that can enhance peer relations and reduce peer-related risks, as well as promote academic engagement and achievement and reduce racial disparities. CL will be delivered with the aid of technology that automates the design and delivery of CL lessons, promoting rapid implementation, scalability, high fidelity, accessibility, and sustainability.

Detailed description

Internalizing symptoms (i.e., anxiety, depressive symptoms, suicidality) are alarmingly common among adolescents. In 2019, nearly 37% of high school students reported feeling anxious, sad, or hopeless, representing an increase from 2017 (i.e., 31%), and nearly 19% seriously considered suicide, an increase from 2017 (17%). The coronavirus pandemic has exacerbated this problem, with research finding that social isolation resulting from the pandemic was linked to higher levels of stress, fear, loneliness, anxiety, depression, and suicide ideation among adolescents. Importantly, ethnic/racial disparities have been documented in internalizing symptoms, with more negative outcomes for Latinas and Black males. Current universal school-based approaches to prevention have reported uneven or limited effects, or no effects at all. Questions have also been raised regarding cost and accessibility. Despite the uneven track record of universal school-based (Tier 1) approaches, which has led some to recommend an emphasis on targeted (Tier 2) approaches, Tier 1 programs possess several advantages. First, given the demographic heterogeneity in risk factors, as well as disparate access to high-quality, culturally-sensitive health care, schools remain attractive as Tier 1 programs can ensure equitable access to primary prevention services. Second, universal programs avoid the difficulty of identifying adolescents at risk, and third, Tier 1 programs minimize the risk of stigmatizing adolescents who seek out or are referred to services. In this project, submitted to the Transformative Research Award initiative, the investigators will use cooperative learning (CL) as a universal (Tier 1) school-based prevention program to target malleable peer-based risk factors and subsequently evaluate how change in these mechanisms can reduce adolescent internalizing symptoms. CL targets various forms of maladaptive peer relations that create stress and comprise a significant risk factor for internalizing symptoms in adolescence; CL also promotes peer protective factors that can reduce the likelihood of internalizing symptoms (e.g., peer acceptance). CL has also been found to promote more cross-race interaction and interracial attraction, greater cross-ethnic academic support, and more frequent cross-ethnic friendships. To support teachers in implementing CL, the investigators will use a Web-based software platform that provides an accessible, high-fidelity mechanism to deliver CL lessons. The investigators will not only test for intervention effects, but will also evaluate the relative strength of specific, theoretically-derived change mechanisms, and uncover key issues/barriers related to implementation that will allow the investigators to dynamically adjust our implementation approach to achieve maximum impact during subsequent scale-up. This project is designed to establish feasibility with teachers and schools and counter potential threats to implementation fidelity while also creating a roadmap to enhanced scalability and sustained implementation. Significant results from this project could inspire broad uptake of this approach in educational contexts, potentially addressing a significant public health need during a time of crisis due to the coronavirus pandemic.

Interventions

PeerLearning.net provides an easy-to-use, scalable, and widely accessible means to support teachers in effectively designing and delivering high-fidelity Cooperative Learning (CL) lessons and, in turn, it has the potential to amplify the positive effects of CL found in previous research. Using PeerLearning.net, teachers design their lesson by selecting from among a set of typical CL lesson templates (e.g., jigsaw, peer tutoring, group projects) which they can customize and populate with their own curriculum and materials. These design templates represent the optimal, high-fidelity design that is required in order for CL to be successful. During lesson delivery, PeerLearning.net manages membership in learning groups, distributes instructional materials, directs student activities according to a pre-specified timetable, supports teacher observations of student behavior, and delivers post-lesson group activities and reviews.

Sponsors

Arizona State University
CollaboratorOTHER
University of Wisconsin, Madison
CollaboratorOTHER
Oregon Research Institute
CollaboratorOTHER
University of Oregon
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Intervention model description

Investigators will allocate 20 high schools to intervention vs. control groups. Investigators will recruit in two cohorts (Fall 2023 and Fall 2024). Students will be in 9th grade in the first year, and will be followed into 10th, 11th, and then 12th grade, so in total the investigators will be working in each school for four years.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
14 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* All students and teachers in target grades in participating schools.

Exclusion criteria

* None.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7Fall of Year 1Anxiety (scores zero to 3, higher scores imply worse outcome)
Patient Health QuestionnaireFall of Year 1Depressive symptoms (scores zero to 3, higher scores imply worse outcome)
Youth Risk and Behavior SurveyFall of Year 1Suicide ideation (scores zero to 6, higher scores imply worse outcome)
Service Assessment for Children and AdolescentsFall of Year 1Service utilization (scores zero to 20, higher scores imply worse outcome)

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Substance useFall of Year 1Use of tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana (scores 1 to 5, lower scores imply better outcome)
Adolescent Stress QuestionnaireFall of Year 1Social stress (scores 1 to 5, higher scores imply worse outcome)
Classroom Life ScaleFall of Year 1Peer academic support (scores 1 to 5, higher scores imply better outcome)
Everyday Discrimination ScaleFall of Year 1Discrimination (scores zero to 4, higher scores imply worse outcome)
Reasons for Non-AttendanceFall of Year 1Social issues causing non-attendance (scores 0 to 4, lower scores imply better outcome)
UCLA Loneliness ScaleFall of Year 1Loneliness (scores 1 to 3, lower scores imply better outcome)
Secondary School Readiness InventoryFall of Year 1School engagement (scores 1 to 5, higher scores imply better outcome)
School AttendanceFall of Year 1Degree of truancy (scores 0 to 4, lower scores imply better outcome)
University of Illinois Bully ScaleFall of Year 1Bullying and victimization (scores 1 to 5, higher scores imply worse outcome)
Child Peer Social Skills ScaleFall of Year 1Peer acceptance (scores 1 to 5, higher scores imply better outcome)
Perceived Stress ScaleFall of Year 1Stress (scores 0 to 4, higher scores imply worse outcome)

Countries

United States

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026