Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30691052›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2019

Causal Modelling for Supporting Planning and Management of Mental Health Services and Systems: A Systematic Review.

Nerea Almeda, Carlos R García-Alonso, José A Salinas-Pérez, Mencía R Gutiérrez-Colosía, Luis Salvador-Carulla

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Acute psychiatric care: approaches to increasing the range of services and improving access and quality of care.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Assessing and Improving the Quality in Mental Health Services.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    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

5 authors.

Nerea AlmedaUniversidad Loyola Andalucía, Department of Psychology, C/ Energía Solar 1, 41014 Seville, Spain. nmalmeda@uloyola.es.
Carlos R García-AlonsoUniversidad Loyola Andalucía, Department of Quantitative Methods, C/ Energía Solar 1, 41014 Seville, Spain. cgarcia@uloyola.es.
José A Salinas-PérezUniversidad Loyola Andalucía, Department of Quantitative Methods, C/ Energía Solar 1, 41014 Seville, Spain. jsalinas@uloyola.es.
Mencía R Gutiérrez-ColosíaUniversidad Loyola Andalucía, Department of Psychology, C/ Energía Solar 1, 41014 Seville, Spain. menciaruiz@uloyola.es.
Luis Salvador-CarullaCentre for Mental Health Research, Research School of Population Health, Australian National University, 63 Eggleston Rd, Acton ACT 2601, Australia. luis.salvador-carulla@anu.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mental health services and systems (MHSS) are characterized by their complexity. Causal modelling is a tool for decision-making based on identifying critical variables and their causal relationships. In the last two decades, great efforts have been made to provide integrated and balanced mental health care, but there is no a clear systematization of causal links among MHSS variables. This study aims to review the empirical background of causal modelling applications (Bayesian networks and structural equation modelling) for MHSS management. The study followed the PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO: CRD42018102518). The quality of the studies was assessed by using a new checklist based on MHSS structure, target population, resources, outcomes, and methodology. Seven out of 1847 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. After the review, the selected papers showed very different objectives and subjects of study. This finding seems to indicate that causal modelling has potential to be relevant for decision-making. The main findings provided information about the complexity of the analyzed systems, distinguishing whether they analyzed a single MHSS or a group of MHSSs. The discriminative power of the checklist for quality assessment was evaluated, with positive results. This review identified relevant strategies for policy-making. Causal modelling can be used for better understanding the MHSS behavior, identifying service performance factors, and improving evidence-informed policy-making.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalBayes TheoremDecision MakingHumansMental Health ServicesPolicy MakingBayesian networkscausal modelmental health care, managementmental health servicesmental health systemsplanningpolicy-makingstructural equation modellingsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID30691052
PMCPMC6388254

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.