Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24760874›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of epidemiology2014

Estimating the coverage of mental health programmes: a systematic review.

Mary J De Silva, Lucy Lee, Daniela C Fuhr, Sujit Rathod, Dan Chisholm, Joanna Schellenberg, Vikram Patel

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of epidemiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
66citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

66 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Mary J De SilvaCentre for Global Mental Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK, Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, Faculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK and Sangath, Alto-Porvorim, Goa, India.
Lucy Lee
Daniela C Fuhr
Sujit Rathod
Dan Chisholm
Joanna Schellenberg
Vikram Patel

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K012126/1Wellcome Trust 091834World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe large treatment gap for people suffering from mental disorders has led to initiatives to scale up mental health services. In order to track progress, estimates of programme coverage, and changes in coverage over time, are needed.

methodsSystematic review of mental health programme evaluations that assess coverage, measured either as the proportion of the target population in contact with services (contact coverage) or as the proportion of the target population who receive appropriate and effective care (effective coverage). We performed a search of electronic databases and grey literature up to March 2013 and contacted experts in the field. Methods to estimate the numerator (service utilization) and the denominator (target population) were reviewed to explore methods which could be used in programme evaluations.

resultsWe identified 15 735 unique records of which only seven met the inclusion criteria. All studies reported contact coverage. No study explicitly measured effective coverage, but it was possible to estimate this for one study. In six studies the numerator of coverage, service utilization, was estimated using routine clinical information, whereas one study used a national community survey. The methods for estimating the denominator, the population in need of services, were more varied and included national prevalence surveys case registers, and estimates from the literature.

conclusionsVery few coverage estimates are available. Coverage could be estimated at low cost by combining routine programme data with population prevalence estimates from national surveys.

Indexed as

AdolescentCost-Benefit AnalysisDelivery of Health CareHealth Services AccessibilityHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansMental DisordersMental Health Servicesevaluationmental healthprogramme coveragesystematic review

Identifiers

PMID24760874
PMCPMC3997372

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.