Amanda Taylor

The Australian Indigenous Psychology Education Program has paved the way for Indigenising and decolonising psychology programs. While Indigenisation and decolonisation of psychology programs are not yet consistent, exemplar initiatives have emerged within recent times. This paper showcases these exemplars, providing details about the “how to” privilege Indigenous knowledges and decolonising practices. A qualitative research paradigm was used to highlight multiple descriptive case studies. An Aboriginal Participatory Action Research approach honoured Indigenous leadership and governance throughout the process, which supported the use of yarning as the data collection method. The methodological approach illustrated the importance of the psychology discipline supporting epistemological justice via the inclusion of Indigenous research methodologies. The five case studies provided practical strategies and actions that other psychology education providers, and indeed other higher education providers, can use to decolonise discipline programs. Examples of enablers included Indigenous leadership in curricula design and student support within the psychology discipline challenges. Examples of challenges included a lack of resources and epistemological racism. This work reaffirms the call for urgent prioritisation to support, embed, and expand Indigenous knowledges and decolonising praxis within psychology and indeed, across broader health disciplines, in Australia and around the world.

Introduction: The adolescent diet is high in sugars compared with other age groups. Effective approaches to support sugar reduction by adolescents are needed as part of caries prevention. Objective: To systematically review peer-reviewed evidence (1990 to 2023) to identify effective behavior change techniques (BCTs) for sugars reduction in adolescents aged 10 to 16 y. Methods: Nine databases (CINAHL, Cochrane, Dental and Oral Sciences Source, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched. Identified articles were screened independently in duplicate for eligibility. Interventions were eligible if they aimed to change adolescent dietary behavior(s) and reported pre- and postsugar-relevant outcome measures. Interventions from included studies were coded using a 93-item BCT Taxonomy (Michie Taxonomy v1). Risk of bias was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. Evidence synthesis by vote counting (number of studies showing positive versus null or negative effects) was applied to BCTs that were present in more than 5 interventions. Results: Of 16,271 articles identified, 764 were screened in full, yielding 35 studies (in 43 papers), of which 3 were uncodeable. BCTs coded in interventions covered 11 of 16 BCT clusters and 25 of 93 individual BCTs in the BCT taxonomy. The median number of BCTs applied per study was 3 (interquartile range 2–6). Evidence synthesis indicated that the BCTs most positively associated with a positive reduction in sugars were (with the percentage of strong-/moderate-quality studies applying these techniques that successfully reduced sugars intake in brackets) feedback on behavior (100%), information on social and environmental consequences (100%), problem solving (75%), and social comparison (75%). Conclusion: Notwithstanding limitations in available data, the current evidence most strongly supports the use of BCTs relating to feedback on behavior, providing information on the social and environmental consequences, include problem solving and making social comparisons, to lower sugars intake in adolescents. Knowledge Transfer Statement: The results of this study will enable clinicians to provide more effective dietary advice when supporting dietary behavior change to reduce sugars intake in adolescents. The results may also be used by researchers to guide future directions for research into effective sugars reduction in adolescents.

Meta-analyses of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) in schools consistently show small, positive effects, but the field remains dominated by studies with low methodological rigour. Recent large randomised controlled trials in adolescents demonstrate poor traction in this age group together with some adverse effects, creating a crossroads for their future. In their recent commentary on the null effects of the MYRIAD trial (Kuyken et al., 2022), Strohmaier and Bailey (2023) postulated that making mindfulness practice available within the school day may increase the dosage and benefits of MBIs for adolescents, and called for funders to direct efforts at developing and testing this approach. We agree that identifying ways to increase dose beyond weekly classroom lessons is important, but explore whether this suggestion is practical or developmentally appropriate for secondary school settings. Our commentary broadens to group together other large and moderately large RCTs that have also shown disappointing results in adolescents, and presents seven barriers that together may be compounding the lack of effect in this age group. We offer alternative suggestions for future school-based research and delivery of MBIs.

Aim: Mindfulness‐based interventions have been tested as preventive programs for childhood internalizing difficulties, but most research has been at a ‘universal’ level with small to null effects. Mindfulness‐Based Cognitive Therapy for Children (MBCT‐C) has similar effects to Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (CBT) when used as a small‐group, targeted preventive program. Knowledge gaps include the longer‐term effectiveness of MBCT‐C relative to CBT and the benefits of adding a parent module. This trial aims to compare MCBT‐C to traditional CBT, including a parent module, to 15‐months post‐intervention and to test the feasibility and acceptability of adding a parent module. Methods: Participants will be recruited from primary schools in areas of socio‐economic disadvantage in South Australia ( n = 194). Children (aged 9–12) years with signs of internalizing difficulties (e.g., shy, withdrawn, worried), and their parents, will be eligible for this two‐armed randomized controlled non‐inferiority trial (RCT). Children will participate in 10 group sessions of MBCT‐C or CBT, facilitated by psychologists, and parents from both conditions will participate in two parent‐only group sessions. Child self‐report measures include depression and anxiety, as well as attention, mindfulness and self‐compassion. Parent measures include symptoms of depression and anxiety, mindfulness, and parent–child relationship strength. The primary outcome will be child anxiety and depression (Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale‐25). Measures will be collected pre and post intervention, and at 3, 6, 12 and 15‐month follow up. Results: Schools will be recruited from October 2022. Nomination of children will commence from February 2023. Program implementation will begin May 2023. Conclusions: This trial will have implications for the feasibility of involving parents in preventative programs, as well as whether mindfulness‐based interventions prevent internalizing difficulties over time.