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

Abstract

Background: This 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). Methods: We 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. Results: The 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. Conclusion: the systematic review could help health specialists and other professionals to identify evidence-based strategies to deal with child and adolescents with mental health conditions.

A systematic review of evidence-based interventions for child and adolescent mental health problems in low- and middle-income countries

“…The study design and report of this review is based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) [14]. The protocol of this review is registered in PROSPERO under the number CRD42019129376 and has been previously published [15].…”

Efficacy of school-based interventions for mental health problems in children and adolescents in low and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

“…The protocol for this systematic review was previously published in Medicine (Baltimore) (18) and is registered in…”

“…Details on our search strategy and other relevant methodological aspects of our review can be found in our study protocol, which has been previously published (18).…”

Early Intervention Programs for Adolescents and Young Adults With Eating Disorders

“…Approximately one-third of the studies were excluded because they were either study protocols, duplicates, abstracts, editorial letters, or were not CEAs (i.e., the study did not consider both cost and clinical outcomes). [31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40] Of the remaining studies, the most common reasons for exclusion were that either the modelled population or the intervention was not aligned with the research question (n = 22). With regard to the population, there were 2 common reasons for exclusion: either the mean age was outside the age range of interest (n = 4) or the study did not specifically consider a population with an eating disorder (n = 4) (e.g., the study populations included mental health indications other than eating disorders or the population only had to have self-reported body image concerns).…”