The efficacy of universal, selective and targeted anxiety interventions in young children.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Anxiety disorders in older children and adolescents have long been acknowledgedas impairing, persistent and predictive of future anxiety and mood-related disorders. Until recently, however, anxiety in preschoolers and younger children has been regarded as relatively uncommon and within normal developmental parameters. Increasing evidence is suggestive that symptoms of anxiety in preschoolers parallel those in older children (Hirshfeld-Becker, Micco, Mazirsky, Bruett, & Henin, 2011) with this under-investigated area attracting increasing interest from researchers and clinicians alike. The present meta-analytic review evaluates the efficacy of early intervention and prevention programs for anxiety in young children (aged 2–9 years) with a specific focus on the application of such programs in the school context, the implications of these programs for educators and counsellors, and the adequacy of principles that underly a theory of change to facilitate effective intervention. The studies reviewed show that intervening early in children’s lives shows promise as an effective strategy to reduce anxiety symptoms; however, there is still a significant amount of work to be done in terms of improving study quality and refining the principles necessary to guide early intervention and prevention approaches.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".