Question · asked by 1 review
Integrated management of childhood illness strategy vs usual care: All‐cause mortality
- Population
- children under 5 years of age
- Intervention
- Integrated management of childhood illness strategy
- Comparison
- usual care
- Outcome
- All‐cause mortality
Integrated management of childhood illness strategy showed no clear difference in mortality compared with routine care (low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Integrated management of childhood illness strategy vs routine care Mortality · children < 5 years of age Integrated management of childhood illness strategy showed no clear difference in mortality compared with routine care (low certainty). Integrated management of childhood illness (IMCI) strategy for children under five (2016) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Risk ratio 0.87 [0.68, 1.1] | 1 study · 5090 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Integrated management of childhood illness (IMCI) strategy for children under five 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | Not extracted | Not assessed |
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.