Data were extracted from included papers, but heterogeneity prevented meta-analysis.
Findings:We conducted a systematic review of evidence to date, of mhGAP-IG implementation and evaluation in LMICs. 33 included studies reported 15 training courses, nine clinical implementations, three country contextualisations, three economic models, two uses as control interventions and one use to develop a rating scale. Our review identified the importance of qualitative reports of contextual challenges in the field, alongside detailed protocols, qualitative studies and randomised controlled trials.
Conclusions:The mhGAP-IG literature is substantial, relative to other published evaluations of clinical practice guidelines: an important contribution to a neglected field.3