4 209 MENTAL HEALTH OUTCOMES OF APPLIED GAME MINDLIGHT self-efficacy (M = −0.28, SD = 0.76), internalising symptoms (M = 1.50, SD = 2.22), and externalising symptoms (M = 1.10, SD = 1.80) at post-test in children in the CBT condition of the Van Starrenburg et al. (2017) trial. To further examine the effectiveness of MindLight on the secondary outcomes (i.e., social, emotional, and academic self-efficacy, internalising and externalising problems), Latent Growth Curve Modelling (LGCM) was performed using Mplus 7.2 (Muthén & Muthén 1998–2012). First, we estimated the initial model based on the four time points (i.e., pre-test, post-test, 3- and 6-months FU) without any predictors or control variables. Second, we tested whether condition predicted initial levels of outcomes (i.e., intercept) and/or rates of change in outcomes (i.e., slope). For our second aim, predictors (i.e., baseline anxiety symptoms, maternal mental health problems and self-efficacy) of the effectiveness of MindLight and CBT on anxiety symptoms were also assessed with LGCM. The effectiveness on anxiety symptoms was already reported in Schoneveld et al. (2018). For the current analyses, we started with the quadratic growth model of anxiety symptoms found in Schoneveld et al. (2018) and added the outcome predictors measured at pre-test (i.e., social, emotional, and academic self-efficacy) next to condition as predictors. In addition, we added maternal depression, anxiety and stress, and baseline anxiety levels as predictors. This was done separately for the model based on child-reported and mother-reported total anxiety symptoms. To determine model fit, we used the Chi-square an p value, the Comparative Fit Index (CFI, critical value ≥ 0.95), Tucker Lewis Index (TLI, critical value ≥ 0.95) and the Root Mean Squared Estimate of Approximation (RMSEA, critical value ≤ 0.06) (Hu & Bentler 1999). The default maximum likelihood estimator was used. Attrition analyses were conducted but no systematic relationships were found between baseline covariates and missingness. The model was estimated using all available data. RESULTS Descriptive Statistics Means and SDs of all study variables at all-time points separately for condition are shown in Table 1. Randomisation was successful. Details of the randomisation results are available elsewhere (see Schoneveld et al., 2018). In addition, no differences were found on the outcome predictors: baseline anxiety symptoms child report, baseline anxiety symptoms mother report, maternal depression, maternal anxiety, and maternal stress.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw