PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 12, 2026Frontiers in Psychiatry0 citationsOpen Access

Scoping review of precision child and youth mental health research: dwelling in possibility

View Full Paper
JLJoonsoo Sean LyeoABAngelica BlaisPCPaula Cloutier

Key Points

  • This review aims to summarize the current landscape of precision child and youth mental health research.
  • Conducted a scoping review following Joanna Briggs Institute methodology.
  • Searched PubMed and Embase for studies from 1980 to 2024.
  • Analyzed 124 publications using descriptive quantitative and qualitative content analysis.
  • 48% of studies were published between 2020 and 2024, with many from the U.S.
  • Majority of studies were observational in design.
  • Four focus areas identified: biomarkers (68%), non-biological markers (17%), interventions (14%), and predictive algorithms (5%).
  • PCYMH tools are underutilized and rarely combined in studies.

Abstract

Introduction Precision child and youth mental health (PCYMH) offers a promising array of tools and methodologies to address the intensifying burden of mental health challenges in child and youth populations. However, the current state of PCYMH research requires better characterization. To this end, we conducted a scoping review aiming to provide a ‘lay of the literature’ for this emerging field. Methods Following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews, we searched PubMed and Embase for PCYMH studies from January 1, 1980 to November 30, 2023, updating the search on November 1, 2024. The final dataset comprised 124 publications, summarized with descriptive quantitative analysis and qualitative content analysis. Results Quantitative analyses revealed that 48% (60/124) of studies had been published between 2020 and 2024, with the majority (51% (63/124)) studying populations in the U.S. Most studies were observational in design. Content analysis revealed four categories of PCYMH research focus: (1) Biomarkers (68% (84/124)); (2) Non-Biological Markers (17% (22/124)); (3) Implementation of PCYMH Interventions (14% (17/124)); and (4) Predictive Algorithms (5% (6/124)). PCYMH tools were underutilized and infrequently combined. Studies producing multimodal profiles of participants, e.g., using neuroimaging, genetics, digital health data, and lifestyle data were scarce. No study used reporting guidelines. Discussion Our findings indicate that this body of research is still in its infancy. We highlight opportunities to advance the study of PCYMH and provide recommendations to support the maturation of this new field.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Lyeo et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/698d6d445be6419ac0d52361https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1691548
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1A meta-analysis of diagnostic yield and clinical utility of genome and exome sequencing in pediatric rare and undiagnosed genetic diseases2025 · 45 citations
  2. 2Urine proteome analysis to evaluate protein biomarkers in children with autism2015 · 24 citations
  3. 3Detection of traumatic stress in the presence of traumatic experiences: the role of resilience factors in foster care children five years or younger2023 · 4 citations
  4. 4Resting-state functional connectivity of the amygdala and longitudinal changes in depression severity in adolescent depression2016 · 182 citations
  5. 5Regional Vulnerability Indices in Youth With Persistent and Distressing Psychoticlike Experiences2023 · 15 citations