• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

多组分中学健康促进干预与青少年健康:印度比哈尔邦 SEHER 集群随机对照试验的延伸。

A multicomponent secondary school health promotion intervention and adolescent health: An extension of the SEHER cluster randomised controlled trial in Bihar, India.

机构信息

Sangath, Porvorim, Goa, India.

Population Council, New Delhi, India.

出版信息

PLoS Med. 2020 Feb 11;17(2):e1003021. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003021. eCollection 2020 Feb.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pmed.1003021
PMID:32045409
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7012396/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Strengthening Evidence base on scHool-based intErventions for pRomoting adolescent health (SEHER) is a multicomponent, whole-school health promotion intervention delivered by a lay counsellor or a teacher in government-run secondary schools in Bihar, India. The objective of this study is to examine the effects of the intervention after two years of follow-up and to evaluate the consistency of the findings observed over time.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We conducted a cluster randomised trial in which 75 schools were randomised (1:1:1) to receive the SEHER intervention delivered by a lay counsellor (SEHER Mitra [SM]) or a teacher (Teacher as SEHER Mitra [TSM]), respectively, alongside a standardised, classroom-based life skills Adolescence Education Program (AEP), compared to AEP alone (control group). The trial design was a repeat cross-sectional study. Students enrolled in grade 9 (aged 13-15 years) in the 2015-2016 academic year were exposed to the intervention for two years and the outcome assessment was conducted at three time points─at baseline in June 2015; 8-months follow-up in March 2016, when the students were still in grade 9; and endpoint at 17-months follow-up in December 2016 (when the students were in grade 10), the results of which are presented in this paper. The primary outcome, school climate, was measured with the Beyond Blue School Climate Questionnaire (BBSCQ). Intervention effects were estimated using mixed-effects linear or logistic regression, including a random effect to adjust for within-school clustering, minimisation variables, baseline cluster-level score of the outcome, and sociodemographic characteristics. In total, 15,232 students participated in the 17-month survey. Compared with the control group, the participants in the SM intervention group reported improvements in school climate (adjusted mean difference [aMD] = 7.33; 95% CI: 6.60-8.06; p < 0.001) and most secondary outcomes (depression: aMD = -4.64; 95% CI: -5.83-3.45; p < 0.001; attitude towards gender equity: aMD = 1.02; 95% CI: 0.65-1.40; p < 0.001; frequency of bullying: aMD = -2.77; 95% CI: -3.40 to -2.14; p < 0.001; violence victimisation: odds ratio [OR] = 0.08; 95% CI: 0.04-0.14; p < 0.001; and violence perpetration: OR = 0.16; 95% CI: 0.09-0.29; p < 0.001). There was no evidence of an intervention effect in the TSM group compared with control group. The effects of the lay counsellor-delivered intervention were larger for most outcomes at 17-months follow-up compared with those at 8 months: school climate (effect size [ES; 95% CI] = 2.23 [1.97-2.50] versus 1.88 [1.44-2.32], p < 0.001); depression (ES [95% CI] = -1.19 [-1.56 to -0.82] versus -0.27 [-0.44 to -0.11], p < 0.001); attitude towards gender equity (ES [95% CI] = 0.53 [0.27-0.79] versus 0.23 [0.10-0.36], p < 0.001); bullying (ES [95% CI] = -2.22 [-2.84 to -1.60] versus -0.47 [-0.61 to -0.33], p < 0.001); violence victimisation (OR [95% CI] = 0.08 [0.04-0.14] versus 0.62 [0.46-0.84], p < 0.001); and violence perpetration (OR [95% CI] = 0.16 [0.09-0.29] versus 0.68 [0.48-0.96], p < 0.001), suggesting incremental benefits with an extended intervention. A limitation of the study is that 27% of baseline participants did not complete the 17-month outcome assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

The trial showed that the second-year outcomes were similar to the first-year outcomes, with no effect of the teacher-led intervention and larger benefits on school climate and adolescent health accruing from extending lay counsellor-delivered intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02907125.

摘要

背景

加强学校为促进青少年健康而开展的基于证据的干预措施(SEHER)是一个多成分的、全校范围的健康促进干预措施,由一名非专业辅导员或一名教师在印度比哈尔邦的政府运营的中学实施。本研究的目的是在两年的随访后评估干预措施的效果,并评估随着时间的推移观察到的结果的一致性。

方法和发现

我们进行了一项集群随机试验,其中 75 所学校被随机分配(1:1:1),分别接受由非专业辅导员(SEHER 米特拉 [SM])或教师(作为 SEHER 米特拉的教师 [TSM])实施的 SEHER 干预措施,以及标准的、基于课堂的青春期教育方案(AEP),与仅接受 AEP 的对照组相比。试验设计是重复的横断面研究。2015-2016 学年入学的 9 年级(年龄 13-15 岁)学生接受了为期两年的干预,在三个时间点进行了结果评估——2015 年 6 月的基线;2016 年 3 月的 8 个月随访期,当时学生仍在 9 年级;以及 2016 年 12 月的 17 个月随访期(当时学生在 10 年级),本研究报告了这些结果。主要结局指标是学校氛围,使用 Beyond Blue 学校氛围调查问卷(BBSCQ)进行测量。使用混合效应线性或逻辑回归估计干预效果,包括一个随机效应来调整校内聚类、最小化变量、结局的基线聚类得分以及社会人口统计学特征。共有 15232 名学生参加了 17 个月的调查。与对照组相比,SM 干预组的参与者报告学校氛围改善(调整平均差异[aMD]=7.33;95%CI:6.60-8.06;p<0.001)和大多数次要结局改善(抑郁:aMD=-4.64;95%CI:-5.83-3.45;p<0.001;对性别平等的态度:aMD=1.02;95%CI:0.65-1.40;p<0.001;欺凌频率:aMD=-2.77;95%CI:-3.40-2.14;p<0.001;暴力受害:比值比[OR]=0.08;95%CI:0.04-0.14;p<0.001;暴力实施:OR=0.16;95%CI:0.09-0.29;p<0.001)。与对照组相比,TSM 组没有干预效果的证据。与 8 个月时相比,17 个月时非专业辅导员实施的干预措施对大多数结局的效果更大:学校氛围(效应大小[ES;95%CI]=2.23[1.97-2.50]与 1.88[1.44-2.32],p<0.001);抑郁(ES[95%CI]=-1.19[-1.56 至-0.82]与-0.27[-0.44 至-0.11],p<0.001);对性别平等的态度(ES[95%CI]=0.53[0.27-0.79]与 0.23[0.10-0.36],p<0.001);欺凌(ES[95%CI]=-2.22[-2.84 至-1.60]与-0.47[-0.61 至-0.33],p<0.001);暴力受害(OR[95%CI]=0.08[0.04-0.14]与 0.62[0.46-0.84],p<0.001);以及暴力实施(OR[95%CI]=0.16[0.09-0.29]与 0.68[0.48-0.96],p<0.001),表明干预的延长具有额外的益处。研究的一个局限性是,基线参与者中有 27%没有完成 17 个月的结局评估。

结论

试验表明,第二年的结果与第一年的结果相似,教师主导的干预措施没有效果,延长非专业辅导员实施的干预措施对学校氛围和青少年健康有更大的益处。

试验注册

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02907125。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/082b/7012396/44da4666ceb1/pmed.1003021.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/082b/7012396/44da4666ceb1/pmed.1003021.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/082b/7012396/44da4666ceb1/pmed.1003021.g001.jpg

相似文献

1
A multicomponent secondary school health promotion intervention and adolescent health: An extension of the SEHER cluster randomised controlled trial in Bihar, India.多组分中学健康促进干预与青少年健康:印度比哈尔邦 SEHER 集群随机对照试验的延伸。
PLoS Med. 2020 Feb 11;17(2):e1003021. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003021. eCollection 2020 Feb.
2
Promoting school climate and health outcomes with the SEHER multi-component secondary school intervention in Bihar, India: a cluster-randomised controlled trial.利用 SEHER 多组分中学干预在印度比哈尔邦促进学校气候和健康结果:一项集群随机对照试验。
Lancet. 2018 Dec 8;392(10163):2465-2477. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31615-5. Epub 2018 Nov 22.
3
The development and pilot testing of a multicomponent health promotion intervention (SEHER) for secondary schools in Bihar, India.印度比哈尔邦针对中学的多成分健康促进干预措施(SEHER)的开发与试点测试。
Glob Health Action. 2017;10(1):1385284. doi: 10.1080/16549716.2017.1385284.
4
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
5
Initiating change locally in bullying and aggression through the school environment (INCLUSIVE): study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial.通过学校环境在欺凌和攻击行为方面进行本地变革(包容性):一项整群随机对照试验的研究方案
Trials. 2014 Sep 30;15:381. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-381.
6
Initiating change locally in bullying and aggression through the school environment (INCLUSIVE) trial: update to cluster randomised controlled trial protocol.通过学校环境在欺凌和攻击行为方面进行本地变革(包容性)试验:群组随机对照试验方案更新
Trials. 2017 May 25;18(1):238. doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-1984-6.
7
The Mediating Effect of School Climate on Adolescent Mental Health: Findings From a Randomized Controlled Trial of a School-Wide Intervention.学校氛围对青少年心理健康的中介效应:一项学校范围干预的随机对照试验结果。
J Adolesc Health. 2021 Jul;69(1):90-99. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.09.030. Epub 2020 Oct 28.
8
Violence outcomes in later adolescence with the Good School Toolkit-Primary: a nonrandomized controlled trial in Uganda.《好学校工具包-小学》在乌干达的一项非随机对照试验:青少年后期的暴力结果。
BMC Public Health. 2024 Jun 7;24(1):1532. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-19024-5.
9
10
Effectiveness and costs associated with a lay counselor-delivered, brief problem-solving mental health intervention for adolescents in urban, low-income schools in India: 12-month outcomes of a randomized controlled trial.在印度城市低收入学校中,由非专业顾问提供的简短问题解决心理健康干预对青少年的效果和成本:一项随机对照试验的 12 个月结果。
PLoS Med. 2021 Sep 28;18(9):e1003778. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003778. eCollection 2021 Sep.

引用本文的文献

1
"Sexuality education is a double edge-sword…": a qualitative study on perceptions of school teachers on sexual and reproductive health of adolescent girls in Eastern India.“性教育是一把双刃剑……”:关于印度东部学校教师对少女性与生殖健康认知的质性研究
Reprod Health. 2025 Aug 11;22(1):145. doi: 10.1186/s12978-025-02098-8.
2
Revisiting 15 000 hours: towards sustainable school systems for mental health, well-being and learning.重温15000小时:迈向促进心理健康、幸福和学习的可持续学校体系。
BJPsych Open. 2025 Jul 21;11(4):e157. doi: 10.1192/bjo.2025.10058.
3
Evidence and Gap Map of Whole-School Interventions Promoting Mental Health and Preventing Risk Behaviours in Adolescence: Programme Component Mapping Within the Health-Promoting Schools Framework: An evidence and gap map.

本文引用的文献

1
India's response to adolescent mental health: a policy review and stakeholder analysis.印度应对青少年心理健康问题的政策:政策评估和利益相关方分析。
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2019 Apr;54(4):405-414. doi: 10.1007/s00127-018-1647-2. Epub 2019 Jan 3.
2
Promoting school climate and health outcomes with the SEHER multi-component secondary school intervention in Bihar, India: a cluster-randomised controlled trial.利用 SEHER 多组分中学干预在印度比哈尔邦促进学校气候和健康结果:一项集群随机对照试验。
Lancet. 2018 Dec 8;392(10163):2465-2477. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31615-5. Epub 2018 Nov 22.
3
Universal, school-based interventions to promote mental and emotional well-being: what is being done in the UK and does it work? A systematic review.
促进青少年心理健康和预防风险行为的全学校干预措施的证据与差距图:健康促进学校框架内的计划组成部分映射:一份证据与差距图。
Campbell Syst Rev. 2025 Mar 10;21(1):e70024. doi: 10.1002/cl2.70024. eCollection 2025 Mar.
4
Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Effectiveness of Whole-school Interventions Promoting Mental Health and Preventing Risk Behaviours in Adolescence.促进青少年心理健康和预防风险行为的全校干预措施有效性的系统评价与荟萃分析
J Youth Adolesc. 2025 Feb;54(2):271-289. doi: 10.1007/s10964-025-02135-6. Epub 2025 Jan 27.
5
Debate: Where to next for universal school-based mental health interventions?辩论:基于学校的普遍心理健康干预措施的下一步走向何方?
Child Adolesc Ment Health. 2025 Feb;30(1):92-95. doi: 10.1111/camh.12749. Epub 2025 Jan 9.
6
Protective role of school climate for impacts of COVID-19 on depressive symptoms and psychotic experiences among adolescents: a population-based cohort study.学校氛围对新冠疫情影响青少年抑郁症状和精神病体验的保护作用:一项基于人群的队列研究
Psychol Med. 2024 Dec 20;54(16):1-8. doi: 10.1017/S0033291724003192.
7
Debate: Where to next for universal school-based mental health interventions? Addressing the mental health crisis among young people in low- and middle-income countries.辩论:基于学校的普遍心理健康干预措施的下一步走向何方?应对低收入和中等收入国家青少年的心理健康危机。
Child Adolesc Ment Health. 2025 Feb;30(1):105-107. doi: 10.1111/camh.12752. Epub 2024 Dec 7.
8
Teaching methods for critical thinking in health education of children up to high school: A scoping review.高中以下儿童健康教育中批判性思维的教学方法:范围综述。
PLoS One. 2024 Jul 18;19(7):e0307094. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0307094. eCollection 2024.
9
A scoping review of the implementation and cultural adaptation of school-based mental health promotion and prevention interventions in low-and middle-income countries.对低收入和中等收入国家基于学校的心理健康促进与预防干预措施的实施及文化适应的范围综述。
Glob Ment Health (Camb). 2024 Apr 12;11:e55. doi: 10.1017/gmh.2024.48. eCollection 2024.
10
How do schools influence the emotional and behavioural health of their pupils? A multi-level analysis of 135 schools in the Born in Bradford inner city multi-ethnic birth cohort.学校如何影响学生的情绪和行为健康?对布拉德福德市出生的多民族出生队列内 135 所学校的多层次分析。
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2024 Aug;59(8):1335-1346. doi: 10.1007/s00127-023-02608-8. Epub 2024 Jan 9.
促进心理和情绪健康的普及性校本干预措施:英国正在采取哪些举措,其效果如何?一项系统综述
BMJ Open. 2018 Sep 8;8(9):e022560. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022560.
4
The development and pilot testing of a multicomponent health promotion intervention (SEHER) for secondary schools in Bihar, India.印度比哈尔邦针对中学的多成分健康促进干预措施(SEHER)的开发与试点测试。
Glob Health Action. 2017;10(1):1385284. doi: 10.1080/16549716.2017.1385284.
5
Our future: a Lancet commission on adolescent health and wellbeing.我们的未来:《柳叶刀》青少年健康与福祉委员会
Lancet. 2016 Jun 11;387(10036):2423-78. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00579-1. Epub 2016 May 9.
6
School-Based Interventions Going Beyond Health Education to Promote Adolescent Health: Systematic Review of Reviews.基于学校的干预措施超越健康教育,促进青少年健康:系统评价综述。
J Adolesc Health. 2016 Apr;58(4):382-396. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2015.12.017.
7
The WHO Health Promoting School framework for improving the health and well-being of students and their academic achievement.世界卫生组织促进健康学校框架,旨在改善学生的健康和福祉以及他们的学业成绩。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Apr 16;2014(4):CD008958. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008958.pub2.
8
Patient health questionnaire-9 as an effective tool for screening of depression among Indian adolescents.患者健康问卷-9 是一种有效工具,可用于筛查印度青少年中的抑郁症。
J Adolesc Health. 2013 May;52(5):546-51. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.09.012. Epub 2012 Dec 2.
9
The acceptability, feasibility and impact of a lay health counsellor delivered health promoting schools programme in India: a case study evaluation.在印度,由非专业健康顾问提供的促进健康的学校项目的可接受性、可行性和影响:案例研究评估。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 May 25;12:127. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-12-127.
10
School-based prevention of depression: a randomised controlled study of the beyondblue schools research initiative.学校层面抑郁预防:超越忧郁计划的一项随机对照研究。
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2010 Feb;51(2):199-209. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2009.02136.x. Epub 2009 Aug 21.