School refusal is a heterogenous problem which typically emerges in adolescence and co-occurs with internalising disorders. A substantial proportion of adolescents do not respond to existing treatment modalities; thus, novel, effective intervention options are needed. Partners in Parenting Plus (PiP+) is a coach-assisted, web-based intervention designed to empower parents to respond to adolescent internalising disorders.

To conduct a process evaluation of PiP+ and identify programme adaptations required to meet the needs of parents of adolescents who refuse school.

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 14 Australian mothers who had: (a) received the PiP+ programme (not tailored for school refusal) during a prior research trial; and (b) reported that their adolescent was refusing school during their participation in PiP+. Inductive thematic analysis was used to analyse interview transcripts.

Participants were 41–53 years old (M = 47.8) and parenting adolescent children aged 14–17 years (M = 14.9). Three themes illustrated how PiP+ features met or could better meet the needs of parents of adolescents who were refusing school: (a) feeling heard, supported and respected; (b) relevance to me and my context; and (c) seeing positive changes. Participants had favourable views of PiP+, especially coached components. Participants requested programme enhancements to better meet the needs of parents of neurodiverse adolescents and discussed the impact of cumulative help-seeking ‘failures’ on self-efficacy and locus of control.

PiP+ was highly acceptable to the majority of parents navigating the issue of school refusal. This has implications for the enhancement of coach-assisted parenting interventions and the context-specific adaptation of PiP+ for school refusal.

Suicidal behaviors are prevalent among college students; however, students remain reluctant to seek support. We developed a predictive algorithm to identify students at risk of suicidal behavior and used telehealth to reduce subsequent risk.

Data come from several waves of a prospective cohort study (2016–2022) of college students (n = 5454). All first-year students were invited to participate as volunteers. (Response rates range: 16.00–19.93%). A stepped-care approach was implemented: (i) all students received a comprehensive list of services; (ii) those reporting past 12-month suicidal ideation were directed to a safety planning application; (iii) those identified as high risk of suicidal behavior by the algorithm or reporting 12-month suicide attempt were contacted via telephone within 24-h of survey completion. Intervention focused on support/safety-planning, and referral to services for this high-risk group.

5454 students ranging in age from 17–36 (s.d. = 5.346) participated; 65% female. The algorithm identified 77% of students reporting subsequent suicidal behavior in the top 15% of predicted probabilities (Sensitivity = 26.26 [95% CI 17.93–36.07]; Specificity = 97.46 [95% CI 96.21–98.38], PPV = 53.06 [95% CI 40.16–65.56]; AUC range: 0.895 [95% CIs 0.872–0.917] to 0.966 [95% CIs 0.939–0.994]). High-risk students in the Intervention Cohort showed a 41.7% reduction in probability of suicidal behavior at 12-month follow-up compared to high-risk students in the Control Cohort.

Predictive risk algorithms embedded into universal screening, coupled with telehealth intervention, offer significant potential as a suicide prevention approach for students.

Family members of people with mental illness (MI) may experience a host of psychological adversities such as increased stress, burden, and reduced wellbeing. However, relatively little is known about siblings. This study aimed to characterise the experience of distress (viz. depressive and anxiety symptoms), burden, and wellbeing in siblings of people with MI.

Studies reporting on quantitative measures of depression, anxiety, burden, or wellbeing in siblings; and/or qualitative findings on siblings’ experience were eligible. The literature search was conducted up until 20th October 2022.

Sixty-two studies comprising data from 3744 siblings were included. The pooled mean percentage of depressive symptoms fell in the mild range at 15.71 (k = 28, N = 2187, 95% CI 12.99–18.43) and anxiety symptoms fell in the minimal range at 22.45 (k = 16, N = 1122, 95% CI 17.09–27.80). Moderator analyses indicate that siblings of people with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder experience greater depressive symptoms than siblings of people with other types of MI (β = −16.38, p < 0.001). Qualitative findings suggest that individuals may be particularly vulnerable during their siblings’ illness onset and times of relapse. Limited communication, confusion about MI, and the need to compensate may contribute to siblings’ distress and/or burden. Siblings’ experience of wellbeing and caregiving were closely related.

This review highlights the complex psychological experience of siblings and the need for greater research and clinical support for this important yet often overlooked cohort.

Children and young people with intellectual disability and/or Autism Spectrum Disorder (autism) experience higher rates of mental health problems, including depression, than their typically developing peers. Although international guidelines suggest psychological therapies as first-line intervention for children and young people, there is limited evidence for psychological therapy for depression in children and young people with intellectual disability and/or autism.

To evaluate the current evidence base for psychological interventions for depression in children and young people with intellectual disability and/or autism, and examine the experiences of children and young people with intellectual disability and/or autism, their families and therapists, in receiving and delivering psychological treatment for depression.

Databases were searched up to 30 April 2020 using pre-defined search terms and criteria. Articles were independently screened and assessed for risk of bias. Data were synthesised and reported in a narrative review format.

A total of 10 studies met the inclusion criteria. Four identified studies were clinical case reports and six were quasi-experimental or experimental studies. All studies were assessed as being of moderate or high risk of bias. Participants with intellectual disability were included in four studies. There was limited data on the experiences of young people, their families or therapists in receiving or delivering psychological treatment for depression.

Well-designed, randomised controlled trials are critical to develop an evidence base for psychological treatment for young people with intellectual disability and/or autism with depression. Future research should evaluate the treatment experiences of young people, their families and therapists.