Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35699742›Full record

SynthesisSocial psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology2022

Exploring the effectiveness of family-based interventions for psychosis in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

Hannah Morillo, Sophie Lowry, Claire Henderson

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Taking care of psychotic disorders globally, beyond clinical management.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

3 authors.

Hannah MorilloKing's College London, London, UK. hannah_misha.morillo@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6893-1093
Sophie LowryKing's College London, London, UK.
Claire HendersonKing's College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6998-5659

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeOf the 80% people with psychosis living in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), up to 90% are left to the care of families. The World Health Organization has recommended the inclusion of families in community-based rehabilitation and while there is evidence of its implementation in LMICs, this has not been reviewed yet. This study aims to describe the key features and implementation strategies of family-based interventions in LMICs, and appraise their effectiveness.

methodsIncluded are people with psychosis in LMICs who receive any form of family-based intervention, compared to their usual or absence of treatment, with patient outcome measures. We searched (August 2021) through Embase, MEDLINE, Global Health, PsycInfo, Social Policy and Practice, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), as well as from grey literature and hand-searched records. Risk of bias was assessed through the Integrated Quality Criteria for Review of Multiple Study Designs (ICROMS) and Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS), then analyzed narratively.

results27 studies were included from the 5254 records. Psychotherapeutic features, systems approach and task-sharing were key intervention elements. Delivery strategies included preliminary research, sustained family engagement, and cultural adaptation. There were positive health impacts across four outcome domains.

conclusionAll studies recommended family-based interventions, with limitations in heterogeneity and 70% of them rated high risk of bias. OTHER: Review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021256856). The authors did not receive funding for this research.

Indexed as

Developing CountriesPsychotic DisordersCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansCommunity mental healthComplex mental health interventionsFamily-based interventionsLow- and middle-income countriesPsychosis

Identifiers

PMID35699742
PMCPMC9375736

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.