# The Use and Outcomes of Compassion‐Focused Group Interventions With Children and Adolescent Clinical Populations: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis

**Authors:** Georgia Roberts, Nicole Parish, Victoria Samuel

PMC · DOI: 10.1002/cpp.70259 · Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy · 2026-03-22

## TL;DR

This review examines how compassion-focused group therapy affects children and adolescents, finding some benefits but noting inconsistent results due to varied study designs.

## Contribution

The paper provides the first systematic review of compassion-focused group interventions for child and adolescent clinical populations.

## Key findings

- Compassion-focused groups may increase self-compassion and improve wellbeing in children and adolescents.
- Study outcomes were mixed, with methodological issues limiting clear conclusions about effectiveness.
- Recent studies (2020 onwards) show an emerging evidence base with room for more consistent research.

## Abstract

Research has investigated the outcomes of compassion‐focused therapy for adult populations, with systematic reviews and meta‐analyses supporting its effectiveness. Comparatively, the literature investigating compassion‐focused interventions for child and adolescent populations is less developed, with fewer empirical studies to date. Most existing literature on compassion interventions has been in a group context. A systematic review was conducted to explore the state of the evidence base for compassion‐focused groups used with child and adolescent clinical populations. This narrative synthesis aimed to review the methodological quality and outcomes of the published and unpublished literature. Ovid, Scopus, EBSCO and ProQuest platforms were utilised to search databases with studies from the year 2005 onwards. Nine studies were identified, including 138 participants receiving a compassion‐focused intervention aged between 11 and 17 years. There was some evidence to suggest that compassion‐focused groups have the potential to increase self‐compassion and improve the wellbeing of children and adolescents. However, the outcomes were varied, and methodological concerns limited interpretations of results. Additionally, the heterogeneity between studies made it challenging to synthesise the literature and draw conclusions regarding the effectiveness of these groups for this population. Future research would benefit from higher quality empirical studies comparing compassion‐focused groups to other interventions, alongside a greater consistency in valid outcome measure use across research.

Summary
This review considers the use and outcomes of compassion‐focused group interventions as a transdiagnostic approach for children and adolescents.Group interventions are a common method of therapy delivery and therefore, a review of these for this population has implications for clinical practice.There was some preliminary evidence that compassion‐focused group interventions can improve both compassion‐focused and wider psychological outcomes. However, the outcomes were mixed, and this review was limited by considerable heterogeneity in study design, outcome measures used and samples recruited.All the studies included were very recent (from 2020 onwards). Therefore, this study has reviewed an emerging body of evidence, and consequently, learning from the limitations may help to guide future clinical practice and research in this area.

This review considers the use and outcomes of compassion‐focused group interventions as a transdiagnostic approach for children and adolescents.

Group interventions are a common method of therapy delivery and therefore, a review of these for this population has implications for clinical practice.

There was some preliminary evidence that compassion‐focused group interventions can improve both compassion‐focused and wider psychological outcomes. However, the outcomes were mixed, and this review was limited by considerable heterogeneity in study design, outcome measures used and samples recruited.

All the studies included were very recent (from 2020 onwards). Therefore, this study has reviewed an emerging body of evidence, and consequently, learning from the limitations may help to guide future clinical practice and research in this area.

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** diabetes (MESH:D003920), Anxiety (MESH:D001007), CFT (MESH:D000068376), pain (MESH:D010146), disordered eating (MESH:D001068), type 1 diabetes (MESH:D003922), fatigue (MESH:D005221), sleep problems (MESH:D012893), low mood (MESH:D019964), psychiatric (MESH:D001523), body image disorder (MESH:D057215), POMRF (MESH:D011248), Self-Injury (MESH:D012652), learning disability (MESH:D007859), Depression (MESH:D003866), cancer (MESH:D009369), Aggression (MESH:D010554), mental health (OMIM:603663), bullying (MESH:D000073397), Trauma (MESH:D014947), conditions (MESH:D020763)
- **Chemicals:** NTG (MESH:D005996), CFT (-)
- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC13006158/full.md

## Figures

1 figure with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC13006158/full.md

## References

73 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC13006158/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC13006158