The over-arching mission of the Center for Collegiate Mental Health (CCMH) is to integrate science and practice in college counseling centers to benefit centers, administrators, researchers, the public, and students receiving college counseling services.
One of the ways CCMH accomplishes this mission is by publishing research in peer-reviewed journals. This showcases the value of the work conducted by college counseling centers and shares insights that can benefit counseling centers across the field. These publications utilize de-identified data from CCMH member centers who have obtained institutional approval to share their information with CCMH for research purposes. CCMH members who are interested in contributing research data can learn more about this process at this link.
The number of counseling centers who contributed de-identified clinical research data to CCMH in 2025 was at an all-time high of 215. This year was also highly productive in terms of peer-reviewed publications (see a list of this and previous years’ publications here). We are thrilled at the growing impact CCMH member centers are having on the field through this research!
This blog summarizes key results from peer-reviewed papers that use CCMH data and clinical tools that CCMH has been made aware of in 2025. For more detailed clinical implications of these studies, we encourage readers to reference the full articles at the links provided. We hope that these findings will be helpful to CCMH members and others interested in collegiate mental health. Additionally, we encourage those who have published with CCMH data or know of additional publications using CCMH data to share them with us by email ([email protected]).
This year, CCMH publications included new findings on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and non-binary, questioning and queer+ (LGBTQ+) college counseling clients, as well as studies of systemic aspects of college counseling centers and CCMH.
LGBTQ+ Clients
Link: Coming soon! (This article is in press as of the date of this blog.)
Key Points:
-
This study examined changes in LGBTQ+ clients’ baseline characteristics using data from 2012-2022. A total of 402,098 clients seen from 2012-2022 were included. 77,381 identified as sexually diverse (LGBQ+), and 7,478 were gender diverse (TGNB+).
-
The authors found that a significantly larger proportion of counseling center clients are identifying as LGBTQ+ over time. From 2012 to 2022, the percentage of LGBQ+ clients increased from 13.0% to 31.2%. The percentage of TGNB+ clients increased from 0.5% to 4.8%.
-
In terms of symptoms, LGBTQ+ clients had higher overall presenting distress than their heterosexual/cisgender peers. Distress increased over time for all clients regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.
-
LGBTQ+ clients reported lower family support than other students. While family support on average decreased over time regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity, this decrease was more pronounced among TGNB+ clients.
-
LGBTQ+ clients reported higher social support than heterosexual/cisgender clients overall. Social support increased over time for the full sample, and this increase was consistent regardless of sexual orientation and gender identity.
Key Points:
-
This study tested (1) the effectiveness of college counseling services for LGBQ+ clients overall, and (2) whether therapists differ in their effectiveness with LGBQ+ clients. The sample included 78,681 clients in individual psychotherapy, 18,569 of whom identified as LGBQ+.
-
On average, LGBQ+ clients’ depression symptoms and general psychological distress decreased slightly less than heterosexual clients during therapy.
-
Certain therapists facilitated less reduction in depression and distress with their LGBQ+ clients than with their heterosexual ones. On the other hand, some therapists demonstrated more effectiveness with LGBQ+ clients.
-
The above finding was also true in terms of therapy dropout: certain therapists had higher dropout rates among their LGBQ+ clients, while others had higher dropout rates for their heterosexual clients.
Systemic Aspects of College Counseling Centers and CCMH
Link: https://societyforpsychotherapy.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/Bulletin-2025-Fall-60-4.pdf#page=12
Key Points:
-
This article featured CCMH as one of four examples of effective practice-research networks (i.e., communities of clinicians and researchers that work together to use data to inform services and produce research).
-
The authors described CCMH’s functions as a mature, large-scale practice-research network. They also reviewed a representative peer-reviewed article that demonstrated the need for colleges and universities to invest in counseling center services in order to support student retention.
-
The paper described the factors that have made CCMH successful, such as its grass-roots development within counseling centers and its focus on serving the needs of its membership.
-
Along with CCMH, the article explained the functions and goals of three other practice-research networks in the United Kingdom and Norway that are highly productive and have produced outstanding clinical and research contributions.
---
Key Points:
-
This study explored whether the symptom domains included in CCMH’s Counseling Center Assessment of Psychological Symptoms (CCAPS) predicted academic dropout in a sample of 573 undergraduate students at a single public university.
-
Students completed the CCAPS during their first semester of classes. Their academic enrollment and graduation were then tracked by the university over the next six years.
-
Scores on the Depression, Academic Distress, and Substance Use CCAPS subscales were significantly higher among those who dropped out than those who graduated. The strongest predictor of dropout was Academic Distress.
-
In a full model that included all CCAPS subscales and mental health treatment history (e.g., prior psychiatric hospitalization), Academic Distress and Substance Use both uniquely predicted dropout. Students of color were also more likely to drop out than White students.
-
The effect of the above predictors (Academic Distress, Substance Use, and race/ethnicity) emerged after students’ first year of classes and became increasingly pronounced over the course of the study.
---
Key Points:
-
This paper compared in-person and telehealth clients’ clinical and demographic characteristics, service utilization, and symptom reduction. It used data from 22,710 clients who received individual therapy from college counseling centers between 2021 and 2023.
-
The authors found some differences in client characteristics between treatment modalities. For example, in-person clients were more likely to identify as cisgender men, heterosexual, living with roommates, Asian/Asian-American, or have experienced recent suicidal ideation.
-
Patterns of utilization (number of appointments scheduled, attendance rate) were nearly identical between in-person and telehealth therapy.
-
There were no differences in symptom reduction between telehealth and in-person therapy after controlling for differences in client characteristics and utilization.
Published 12/18/2025