Psychological interventions for adolescents have shown mixed efficacy, and including parents in interventions may be an important avenue to improve treatment outcomes. Evidence from meta-analyses examining the role of parents in interventions for youth is inconsistent and has typically combined findings for both children and adolescents together. No prior meta-analysis has examined the specific role of parents in adolescent interventions as compared with interventions focused solely on adolescents across several disorders. To address this gap, systematic literature reviews were conducted utilizing a combination of searches among keywords including (parent * OR family) AND (intervention OR therap * OR treatment OR prevent*) AND (adolescen*). Inclusion criteria were (1) a randomized controlled trial of an individual psychological intervention compared to the same intervention with a parental component, and (2) adolescents must have at least current symptoms or risk to be included. Literature searches identified 20 trials (N = 1251). Summary statistics suggested that interventions involving parents in treatment have a significantly greater impact on adolescent psychopathology when compared to interventions that targeted adolescents alone (g = − 0.18, p < .01, 95% CI [− 0.30, − 0.07]). Examination with symptom type (internalizing or externalizing) as a moderator found that the significant difference remained for externalizing (g = − 0.20, p = .01, 95% CI [− 0.35, − 0.05]) but not internalizing psychopathology (p = .11). Findings provide evidence of the importance of including parents in adolescent therapy, particularly for externalizing problems.

对青少年的心理干预效果好坏参半，让父母参与干预可能是改善治疗结果的重要途径。研究父母在青少年干预措施中的作用的荟萃分析证据不一致，并且通常将儿童和青少年的研究结果结合在一起。与仅针对多种疾病的青少年的干预措施相比，之前没有荟萃分析检验过父母在青少年干预措施中的具体作用。为了解决这一差距，我们利用关键字搜索组合进行了系统文献综述，包括（父母 *或家庭）AND（干预或治疗 *或治疗或预防*）AND（青少年*）。纳入标准是（1）个人心理干预与父母参与的相同干预进行比较的随机对照试验，以及（2）青少年必须至少有当前症状或风险才能被纳入。文献检索确定了 20 项试验 ( N  = 1251)。摘要统计数据表明，与单独针对青少年的干预措施相比，涉及父母参与治疗的干预措施对青少年精神病理学的影响显着更大（g = − 0.18，p  < .01，95% CI [− 0.30，− 0.07]）。以症状类型（内化或外化）作为调节因子的检查发现，外化（g = − 0.20，p = .01，95% CI [− 0.35，− 0.05]）仍存在显着差异，但内化精神病理学（ p  = .05  ）则没有显着差异。 11）。研究结果证明了让父母参与青少年治疗的重要性，特别是对于外化问题。