Threat Interpretation Bias as Cognitive Marker and Treatment Target in Pediatric Anxiety

Anxiety is the most common mental health problem in youth, affecting one in four children and adolescents. Unfortunately, evidence-based treatments (pharmacotherapy, cognitive-behavioral therapy) are costly, not widely available, and ineffective for a substantial proportion of youth. In response, experts have called for novel treatments that directly target mechanisms underlying youth anxiety while simultaneously addressing barriers to care (i.e., cost, accessibility). One such promising mechanism is interpretation bias - the inaccurate interpretation of threat from ambiguity. The investigators have previously demonstrated that interpretation bias occurs in over 90% of anxious youth, is predictive of anxiety severity in clinical samples of youth, and differentiates between anxious and non-anxious youth. These data indicate that interpretation bias may be a ubiquitous phenomenon underlying anxiety expression in children and adolescents and therefore may be an ideal intervention target. Cognitive bias modification for interpretation bias (CBM-I) is a computerized intervention that attempts to reduce anxiety by directly modifying interpretation bias. CBM-I has demonstrated preliminary efficacy for reducing anxiety symptoms in adults. Yet extant CBM-I data in anxious youth are sparse, with little work addressing whether CBM-I significantly reduces interpretation bias, and whether this in turn reduces anxiety symptoms, as well as the dose necessary to reduce both bias and anxiety. This two-phased study tests personalized CBM-I in youth ages 10 to 17 who meet diagnostic criteria for a primary anxiety disorder (Separation, Social, Generalized). In the R61 Phase (N=46), a randomized clinical trial (RCT) examines whether CBM-I personalized to youth anxiety symptoms significantly reduces interpretation bias compared to a computerized interpretation control condition (ICC). The interpretation target will be measured at multiple time points (4, 8, 12, 16 sessions) to identify the optimal dose for reduction in interpretation bias. If the R61 trial results indicate that CBM-I outperforms ICC on interpretation bias reduction, the R33 phase will commence. In the R33 Phase, an RCT (N=72) will validate whether CBM-I significantly reduces interpretation bias, and conducts a mechanism test (i.e., does bias reduction precede and predict anxiety reduction?), by comparing CBM-I to cognitive restructuring, a clinically relevant psychosocial intervention that also targets anxious cognition.