Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33972340›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2021

Evaluating quality in adolescent mental health services: a systematic review.

Meaghen Quinlan-Davidson, Kathryn J Roberts, Delan Devakumar, Susan M Sawyer, Rafael Cortez, Ligia Kiss

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Adult Community Perspectives on Improving Rural Youth Access to Mental Health Services: A Participatory Group Concept Mapping Study.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Measuring Experience of Inpatient Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Meaghen Quinlan-DavidsonInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK meaghen.quinlan-davidson.17@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-7875-3753
Kathryn J RobertsInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Delan DevakumarInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Susan M SawyerCentre for Adolescent Health, Royal Children's Hospital; Murdoch Children's Research Institute; and Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Rafael CortezHealth, Nutrition and Population, The World Bank, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Ligia KissInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
University College London · GBRoyal Children's Hospital · AUWorld Bank · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the quality of adolescent mental health service provision globally, according to the WHO Global Standards of adolescent mental health literacy, appropriate package of services and provider competencies. DESIGN AND DATA SOURCES: Systematic review of 5 databases, and screening of eligible articles, from 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2020. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We focused on quantitative and mixed-method studies that evaluated adolescent mental health literacy, appropriate package of services and provider competencies in mental health services, and that targeted depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder among adolescents (10-19 years). This included adolescents exposed to interventions or strategies within mental health services. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS

methodsStudy quality was assessed using the National Institutes for Health Study Quality Assessment Tools. Data were extracted and grouped based on WHO quality Standards.

resultsOf the 20 104 studies identified, 20 articles were included. The majority of studies came from high-income countries, with one from a low-income country. Most of the studies did not conceptualise quality. Results found that an online decision aid was evaluated to increase adolescent mental health literacy. Studies that targeted an appropriate package of services evaluated the quality of engagement between the therapist and adolescent, patient-centred communication, mental health service use, linkages to mental health services, health facility culture and intensive community treatment. Provider competencies focused on studies that evaluated confidence in managing and referring adolescents, collaboration between health facility levels, evidence-based practices and technology use. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: There is limited evidence on quality measures in adolescent mental health services (as conforms to the WHO Global Standards), pointing to a global evidence gap for adolescent mental health services. There are several challenges to overcome, including a need to develop consensus on quality and methods to measure quality in mental health settings. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020161318.

Indexed as

Adolescent Health ServicesHealth LiteracyMental Health ServicesAdolescentAnxiety DisordersHumansMental Healthchild & adolescent psychiatryinternational health servicesmental healthquality in health care

Identifiers

PMID33972340
PMCPMC8112446
OpenAlexW3163596334

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.