Advances in Mental Health and Well-Being in Children (Third Edition)

A special issue of Children (ISSN 2227-9067). This special issue belongs to the section "Pediatric Mental Health".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 15 September 2026 | Viewed by 3880

Special Issue Editors


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
1. University Research Center in Psychology (CUIP), 8005-139 Faro, Portugal
2. Department of Psychology and Education Sciences, University of Algarve, 8005-139 Faro, Portugal
Interests: at-risk family context assessment; family preservation; positive parenting; evidence-based interventions; well-being in children and adolescence
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
1. University Research Center in Psychology (CUIP), 8005-139 Faro, Portugal
2. Department of Psychology and Education Sciences, University of Algarve, 8005-139 Faro, Portugal
Interests: psychopathology; children; adolescents; mental illness; psychotherapeutic processes; treatment

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Mental disorders are the largest cause of the burden of disease in the world. Evidence is accumulating on the broad impact that well-being during childhood and adolescence has on physical and mental health across the course of a lifetime. In fact, most of the disease burden affecting adults has its onset during childhood and adolescence.

There is a growing concern about the mental health and well-being of children, with increasing demand for counseling services and referrals to mental health services. It has been well established in the existing literature that children and young people who experience positive support from parents and teachers may develop psychological resilience. Children and adolescents with higher levels of psychological well-being have higher levels of academic achievement, are more likely to have a higher level of engagement in school life and satisfaction in their later life, and are usually more productive workers.

Family factors, including the quality of parental care, can make a huge difference to children’s early-life pathways, for better or for worse. Understanding the best intervention methods to support parents is a key challenge. Thus, there is a strong need to expand our knowledge on how to reduce risk factors and promote protective environments.

Considering the success and popularity of the previous edition of this Special Issue, ‘Advances in Mental Health and Well-Being in Children (2nd Edition)’, previously published in the Children journal (https://www.mdpi.com/journal/children/special_issues/5VEYEZSR5P), we are now set to release a third edition, where we will focus on emerging themes in regard to promoting mental health and child well-being and interventions in school and community contexts. We invite academics to share their findings, perspectives, and current approaches to key issues in the post-pandemic era, such as the impact of the digital age on physical and mental health and the new socialization challenges facing children and young people. Qualitative or quantitative contributions from basic or applied research that will contribute to enhancing our knowledge of key topics within this field are welcome.

Prof. Dr. Cristina Nunes
Dr. Cláudia Carmo
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 250 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for assessment.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Children is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • children
  • well-being
  • mental health
  • parenting
  • family support
  • evidence-based interventions
  • resilience
  • risk factors
  • protective factors
  • social media
  • post-pandemic

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • Reprint: MDPI Books provides the opportunity to republish successful Special Issues in book format, both online and in print.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Related Special Issue

Published Papers (5 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review, Other

28 pages, 695 KB  
Article
How Many Anxious Kids in Community Mental Health Would Be Eligible for an RCT? And Does It Matter? Insights from a Naturalistic Sample and a Non-Systematic Review
by Anya C. English, Megan Brady, Amanda L. Sanchez and Emily M. Becker-Haimes
Children 2026, 13(3), 413; https://doi.org/10.3390/children13030413 - 18 Mar 2026
Viewed by 612
Abstract
Background: Decades of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) support cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for pediatric anxiety, but exclusion criteria may limit generalizability to routine settings. We examined common exclusion criteria in recent CBT RCTs for pediatric anxiety, trends in these criteria over time, [...] Read more.
Background: Decades of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) support cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for pediatric anxiety, but exclusion criteria may limit generalizability to routine settings. We examined common exclusion criteria in recent CBT RCTs for pediatric anxiety, trends in these criteria over time, and whether meeting RCT exclusion criteria affects outcomes in a naturalistic sample. Methods: We reviewed 81 RCTs from the past 25 years assessing CBT for pediatric anxiety or related disorders to identify common exclusion criteria. We examined how often youth seeking exposure-based treatment for anxiety or OCD at an urban community health center met these exclusion criteria and whether this impacted treatment response, using three-year retrospective chart review data (n = 94). Results: Common exclusion criteria in identified RCTs included psychotropic medication use (66.7%), autism spectrum disorder (63.0%), and other psychiatric comorbidities. Suicidal ideation increased as an exclusion criterion over time (p < 0.05, Cramér’s V = 0.23). Based on these criteria, 53% of participants in our naturalistic sample would have been excluded from one or more RCTs. Excluded patients did not differ in baseline characteristics. Excluded youth required nearly twice as many treatment sessions and had more than double the rate of case management utilization (all ps < 0.01). Conclusions: Youth who would have been excluded from at least one RCT had poorer prognoses. Findings support continued emphasis on pragmatic trials to advance understanding of how to augment treatments to better meet the diverse needs of youth. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Mental Health and Well-Being in Children (Third Edition))
Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 367 KB  
Article
Assessing Irritability in Primary School-Aged Children: How to Test and Whom to Ask
by Susann Tayaranian Djeyhuni, Alexander Prehn-Kristensen, Kamila Jauch-Chara and Manuel Munz
Children 2025, 12(12), 1583; https://doi.org/10.3390/children12121583 - 21 Nov 2025
Viewed by 812
Abstract
Background/Objectives: An increasing number of children and adolescents with mental health issues across many countries highlights the need for effective, accessible prevention strategies. Within the Research Domain Criteria framework, irritability—an emotional response to expected but blocked rewards—has been identified as an early [...] Read more.
Background/Objectives: An increasing number of children and adolescents with mental health issues across many countries highlights the need for effective, accessible prevention strategies. Within the Research Domain Criteria framework, irritability—an emotional response to expected but blocked rewards—has been identified as an early indicator of declining mental well-being before the onset of mental disorders. Developing reliable yet resource-efficient methods to assess irritability is an important first step toward targeted prevention. Methods: We tested the German Version of a frustration Go/No-Go task enabling to deliberately induce frustration through expected but blocked rewards in N = 68 children aged eight to ten (mean age = 8.9 years, SD = 0.7; 36 females) and parallelly assessed irritability with the 7-item low cost Affective Reactivity Index (ARI) with ratings of parents, teachers and children. Results: The German Version of the frustration Go/No-Go task proved reliable and valid. Teacher ratings demonstrated the highest predictive validity for irritability among all informants. Conclusions: Both the 7-item ARI, rated by teachers, and the frustration Go/No-Go task are recommended for assessing irritability. In the future, irritability assessments should be implemented for all primary school-aged children. Based on the components that contribute to irritability, targeted prevention measures should be offered. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Mental Health and Well-Being in Children (Third Edition))
Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research, Other

21 pages, 1219 KB  
Review
Meta-Analysis of Psychological and Digital Interventions to Enhance Mental Health and Well-Being in Youth: A Bayesian Umbrella Review
by Nicolás Sánchez-Álvarez, María J. Blanca and Julio Sánchez-Meca
Children 2026, 13(5), 678; https://doi.org/10.3390/children13050678 - 14 May 2026
Viewed by 207
Abstract
Objective: Youth mental health has become a global public health priority, with psychological distress, anxiety, and depressive symptoms increasing sharply over the last decade. Numerous interventions, ranging from mindfulness-based and cognitive behavioral programs to digital applications and peer-support initiatives, have been evaluated through [...] Read more.
Objective: Youth mental health has become a global public health priority, with psychological distress, anxiety, and depressive symptoms increasing sharply over the last decade. Numerous interventions, ranging from mindfulness-based and cognitive behavioral programs to digital applications and peer-support initiatives, have been evaluated through meta-analytic reviews. However, the cumulative evidence remains heterogeneous and dispersed across intervention modalities. The present umbrella meta-analysis synthesized existing meta-analyses on psychological and digital interventions for adolescents and young adults, adopting a Bayesian random-effects framework to quantify the overall effectiveness and heterogeneity of outcomes. Method: Systematic searches were conducted in PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science up to September 2025, using the following syntax: (“meta-analysis” OR “systematic review”) AND (adolescent* OR “youth” OR “young people”) AND (“mental health” OR “well-being” OR “psychological intervention”). Eligible reviews reported standardized mean differences (Hedges’ g) or convertible statistics and targeted mental health or well-being outcomes. Effect sizes were standardized using Hedges’ g and synthesized under a random-effects framework. They were then pooled using Bayesian random-effects modeling with a Normal (0, 0.52) prior on the grand mean μ and a half-Cauchy (0, 0.5) prior on the heterogeneity variance τ. Results: Nine eligible meta-analyses (k = 9 aggregated effects, ≈1150 primary studies) met the inclusion criteria. The posterior mean standardized effect was μ = 0.229 (95% CrI [0.157, 0.301]), indicating a small but credible positive impact of interventions on youth mental health and well-being indicators (μ = 0.19 for symptom reduction; μ = 0.28 for positive well-being). Between-study heterogeneity was non-negligible (τ2 = 0.003; posterior mean I2 = 23%, 95% CrI [0.04%, 74%]), reflecting uncertainty about the true degree of variability across modalities and settings. The posterior probability that μ > 0 was >0.999, providing strong Bayesian evidence for credible but heterogeneous effects. Conclusions: The findings suggest potentially credible but heterogeneous effects of psychological and digital interventions on youth mental health and well-being outcomes, although the magnitude and consistency of these effects remain constrained by substantial heterogeneity and the breadth of aggregated outcome constructs. Results should be interpreted with appropriate caution. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Mental Health and Well-Being in Children (Third Edition))
Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 552 KB  
Review
Sleep, Emotion, and Sex-Specific Developmental Trajectories in Childhood and Adolescence
by Giuseppe Marano and Marianna Mazza
Children 2026, 13(2), 171; https://doi.org/10.3390/children13020171 - 26 Jan 2026
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1166
Abstract
Sleep plays a central role in shaping emotional development during childhood and adolescence, yet increasing evidence indicates that these processes unfold differently in boys and girls. This narrative review synthesizes current findings on sex-specific associations between sleep patterns, neurodevelopmental trajectories, and emotional regulation [...] Read more.
Sleep plays a central role in shaping emotional development during childhood and adolescence, yet increasing evidence indicates that these processes unfold differently in boys and girls. This narrative review synthesizes current findings on sex-specific associations between sleep patterns, neurodevelopmental trajectories, and emotional regulation across pediatric populations. It examines how biological factors, including pubertal timing, sex hormones, circadian physiology, and maturation of fronto-limbic circuits, interact with environmental influences to generate distinct vulnerabilities to anxiety, depression, and behavioral dysregulation. Growing data suggest that girls exhibit greater sensitivity to sleep disturbances, particularly during the pubertal transition, with stronger links to internalizing symptoms such as anxiety and mood disorders. In contrast, boys appear more prone to externalizing behaviors and show differential responses to circadian misalignment and short sleep duration. Emerging evidence on sex-specific sleep architecture, REM-related emotional processing, and the bidirectional pathways through which sleep quality affects affective functioning are explored. Finally, clinical implications for early detection, personalized prevention, and targeted interventions tailored by sex and developmental stage are discussed. Understanding sex-based differences in sleep–emotion interactions offers a critical opportunity to refine pediatric mental health strategies and improve outcomes across developmental trajectories. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Mental Health and Well-Being in Children (Third Edition))
Show Figures

Figure 1

Other

Jump to: Research, Review

21 pages, 1643 KB  
Systematic Review
Effectiveness of Sucrose Versus Breast Milk as Non-Pharmacological Measures in the Management of Neonatal Pain: A Systematic Review
by Marina Camacho-Pernil, Pastora Tirado-Hernández, María Rodríguez-García, Elena Andrade-Gómez, Javier Fagundo-Rivera and Pablo Fernández-León
Children 2026, 13(5), 676; https://doi.org/10.3390/children13050676 - 14 May 2026
Viewed by 181
Abstract
Background: The neonatal period involves rapid physiological adaptation and high vulnerability to painful stimuli, especially in NICU-admitted infants. Neonates have the neurophysiological capacity for nociception, and repeated pain exposure may impair neurodevelopment. Non-pharmacological interventions, particularly oral sucrose and breast milk, are widely [...] Read more.
Background: The neonatal period involves rapid physiological adaptation and high vulnerability to painful stimuli, especially in NICU-admitted infants. Neonates have the neurophysiological capacity for nociception, and repeated pain exposure may impair neurodevelopment. Non-pharmacological interventions, particularly oral sucrose and breast milk, are widely used as first-line analgesic strategies due to their safety and efficacy. However, heterogeneity in existing studies requires evidence synthesis. Methods: A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines was conducted to assess the effectiveness of sucrose and breast milk in neonatal pain reduction. PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials published between 2019 and 2024. Studies involving neonates undergoing painful procedures and receiving sucrose, breast milk, or both were included. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed independently. Due to heterogeneity in interventions and outcomes, a narrative synthesis was conducted. Results: Thirteen randomized controlled trials were included. Both sucrose and breast milk consistently reduced neonatal pain scores and physiological indicators such as heart rate and oxygen saturation. Sucrose showed rapid, short-term analgesia mediated by endogenous opioid pathways, while breast milk provided additional sensory, nutritional, and emotional benefits that support mother–infant bonding. Multimodal approaches, including kangaroo care, non-nutritive sucking, and swaddling, enhanced analgesic effects. Heterogeneity in protocols and assessment tools limited comparability across studies. Conclusions: Sucrose and breast milk are safe and effective non-pharmacological interventions for neonatal pain management. Their incorporation into standardized multimodal protocols is recommended to optimize analgesia and promote humanized neonatal care. Further research is needed to standardize dosing and evaluate long-term outcomes. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Mental Health and Well-Being in Children (Third Edition))
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop