Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31895812›Full record

ArticleMedicine2020

Effective/cost effective interventions of child mental health problems in low- and middle-income countries (LAMIC): Systematic review.

Antonio Jose Grande, Wagner Silva Ribeiro, Christine Faustino, Claudio Torres de Miranda, David Mcdaid, Andra Fry, Silvia Helena Mendonça de Moraes, Sandra Maria do Valle Leone de Oliveira, Joni Marcio de Farias, Paulo de Tarso Coelho Jardim and 4 more

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Antonio Jose GrandeUniversidade Estadual de Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande, Brazil.
Wagner Silva RibeiroCare Policy and Evaluation Centre, Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, United Kingdom.
Christine FaustinoUniversidade Estadual de Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande, Brazil.
Claudio Torres de MirandaUniversidade Federal de Alagoas, Maceió, Brazil.
David McdaidCare Policy and Evaluation Centre, Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, United Kingdom.
Andra FryLibrary, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, United Kingdom.
Silvia Helena Mendonça de MoraesFIOCRUZ Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande.
Sandra Maria do Valle Leone de OliveiraUniversidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande.
Joni Marcio de FariasUniversidade do Extremo Sul Catarinense, Brazil.
Paulo de Tarso Coelho JardimUniversidade Estadual de Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande, Brazil.
Derek KingCare Policy and Evaluation Centre, Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, United Kingdom.
Valter SilvaCentro Universitário Tiradentes, Maceió.
Carolina ZieboldCare Policy and Evaluation Centre, Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, United Kingdom.
Sara Evans-LackoCare Policy and Evaluation Centre, Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/R022763/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis systematic review protocol aims to examine the evidence of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of interventions for children and adolescents with, or at risk of developing mental disorders in low- and middle-income countries (LAMICs).

methodsWe will search Medline Ovid, EMBASE Ovid, PsycINFO Ovid, CINAHL, LILACS, BDENF and IBECS. We will include randomised and non-randomised controlled trials, economic modelling studies and economic evaluations. Participants are 6 to 18 year-old children and adolescents who live in a LAMIC and who present with, or are at high risk of developing, one or more of the conditions: depression, anxiety, behavioural disorders, eating disorders, psychosis, substance abuse, autism and intellectual disabilities as defined by the DSM-V. Interventions which address suicide, self-harm will also be included, if identified during the extraction process. We will include in person or e-health interventions which have some evidence of effectiveness (in relation to clinical and/or functional outcomes) and which have been delivered to young people in LAMICs. We will consider a wide range of delivery channels (e.g., in person, web-based or virtual, phone), different practitioners (healthcare practitioners, teachers, lay health care providers) and sectors (i.e., primary, secondary and tertiary health care, education, guardianship councils). In the pilot of screening procedures, 5% of all references will be screened by two reviewers. Divergences will be resolved by one expert in mental health research. Reviewers will be retrained afterwards to ensure reliability. The remaining 95% will be screened by one reviewer. Covidence web-based tool will be used to perform screening of references and full text paper, and data extraction.

resultsThe protocol of this systematic review will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences. The results will be presented descriptively and, if possible, meta-analysis will be conducted. Ethical approval is not needed for anonymised secondary data.

conclusionthe systematic review could help health specialists and other professionals to identify evidence-based strategies to deal with child and adolescents with mental health conditions.

Indexed as

Developing CountriesChildHumansNeurodevelopmental DisordersSystematic Reviews as Topic

Identifiers

PMID31895812
PMCPMC6946409

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.