Reports on remote psychotherapies for youth (e.g., technology-based treatment) suggest it is acceptable, feasible, and useful in overcoming logistical barriers to treatment. But how effective is remote care? To find out, PsycINFO and PubMed were searched from 1960 through 2020, supplemented by journal searches and reference trails, to identify randomized controlled trials of youth psychotherapy for anxiety (including obsessive–compulsive disorder and trauma), depression, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), or conduct problems, in which all therapeutic contact occurred remotely. Articles (N = 37) published from 1988 through 2020, reporting 43 treatment-control group comparisons, were identified. Robust variance estimation was used to account for effect size dependencies and to synthesize overall effects and test candidate moderators. Pooled effect size was .47 (95% confidence interval [CI: .26, .67], p < .001) at posttreatment, .44 (95% CI [.12, .76], p < .05) at follow-up—comparable to effects reported in meta-analyses of in-person youth psychotherapy. Effects were significantly (a) larger for remote psychotherapies supported by therapeutic provider contact (.64) than for those accessed by youths, with only logistical support (.22), (b) larger for treatments with phone contact (.65) than for those without (.25), (c) larger for treatment of anxiety (.62) and conduct problems (.78) than ADHD (–.03), and (d) smaller for therapies involving attention/working memory training (–.18) than for those without (.60). Among studies with therapeutic contact, effects were significantly larger when therapists facilitated skill-building (e.g., practicing exposures or problem solving [.68]) than when therapists did not (.18). These findings support the effectiveness of remote psychotherapies for youths, and they highlight moderators of treatment benefit that warrant attention in future research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)

中文翻译：

---

远程提供青少年心理治疗的有效性：荟萃分析。

关于青少年远程心理治疗（例如，基于技术的治疗）的报告表明，它在克服治疗后勤障碍方面是可以接受的、可行的和有用的。但远程护理的效果如何？为了找出答案，我们从 1960 年到 2020 年对 PsycINFO 和 PubMed 进行了搜索，并辅以期刊搜索和参考线索，以确定针对焦虑（包括强迫症和创伤）、抑郁症、注意力缺陷/多动障碍的青少年心理治疗的随机对照试验（ADHD）或行为问题，其中所有治疗接触都是远程发生的。文章（N= 37) 发表于 1988 年至 2020 年，报告了 43 个治疗组与对照组的比较。稳健方差估计用于解释效应大小依赖性并综合整体效应和测试候选调节因子。治疗后合并效应大小为 0.47（95% 置信区间 [CI: .26, .67], p < .001），0.44（95% CI [.12, .76], p< .05) 随访——与面对面青少年心理治疗的荟萃分析报告的效果相当。(a) 由治疗提供者联系支持的远程心理治疗 (.64) 的效果显着大于青少年获得的那些，只有后勤支持 (.22)，(b) 与电话联系的治疗 (.65) 大于那些没有 (.25)，(c) 治疗焦虑 (.62) 和行为问题 (.78) 大于 ADHD (-.03)，(d) 较小的治疗涉及注意力/工作记忆训练 (-. 18）比那些没有（0.60）。在治疗接触的研究中，当治疗师促进技能培养（例如，练习接触或解决问题[.68]）时，效果显着大于治疗师不促进治疗时的效果（.18）。这些发现支持远程心理治疗对青少年的有效性，他们强调了治疗益处的调节因素，在未来的研究中值得关注。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2021 APA，保留所有权利）