Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30673732›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2019

Peer-facilitated community-based interventions for adolescent health in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review.

Kelly Rose-Clarke, Abigail Bentley, Cicely Marston, Audrey Prost

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

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

  1. Measurement and evaluation of community engagement in complex, chronic medical conditions: HIV and obesity as exemplar conditions.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Voluntary Vs Nominated Peer Educators: a Randomized Trial within the NoTrap! Anti-Bullying Program.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2020
    Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Advancing adolescent health promotion in the digital era.Health promotion international · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Peer Education and Peer Counselling for Health and Well-Being: A Review of Reviews.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Review
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

4 authors.

Kelly Rose-ClarkeDepartment of Global Health and Social Medicine, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8959-9184
Abigail BentleyInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Cicely MarstonFaculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Audrey ProstFaculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdolescents aged 10-19 represent one sixth of the world's population and have a high burden of morbidity, particularly in low-resource settings. We know little about the potential of community-based peer facilitators to improve adolescent health in such contexts.

methodsWe did a systematic review of peer-facilitated community-based interventions for adolescent health in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We searched databases for randomised controlled trials of interventions featuring peer education, counselling, activism, and/or outreach facilitated by young people aged 10-24. We included trials with outcomes across key areas of adolescent health: infectious and vaccine preventable diseases, undernutrition, HIV/AIDS, sexual and reproductive health, unintentional injuries, violence, physical disorders, mental disorders and substance use. We summarised evidence from these trials narratively. PROSPERO registration: CRD42016039190.

resultsWe found 20 studies (61,014 adolescents). Fourteen studies tested interventions linked to schools or colleges, and 12 had non-peer-facilitated components, e.g. health worker training. Four studies had HIV-related outcomes, but none reported reductions in HIV prevalence or incidence. Nine studies had clinical sexual and reproductive health outcomes, but only one reported a positive effect: a reduction in Herpes Simplex Virus-2 incidence. Three studies had violence-related outcomes, two of which reported reductions in physical violence by school staff and perpetration of physical violence by adolescents. Seven studies had mental health outcomes, four of which reported reductions in depressive symptoms. Finally, we found eight studies on substance use, four of which reported reductions in alcohol consumption and smoking or tobacco use. There were no studies on infectious and vaccine preventable diseases, undernutrition, or injuries.

conclusionsThere are few trials on the effects of peer-facilitated community-based interventions for adolescent health in LMICs. Existing trials have mixed results, with the most promising evidence supporting work with peer facilitators to improve adolescent mental health and reduce substance use and violence.

Indexed as

Community Health ServicesIncomePeer GroupAdolescentAdolescent HealthBiasDeveloping CountriesHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansOutcome Assessment, Health Care

Identifiers

PMID30673732
PMCPMC6343892

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.