Question · asked by 1 review
Lay health worker‐led psychosocial interventions vs usual care or no treatment: Disease prevalence
- Population
- children/adolescents with post‐traumatic stress and related depressive/anxiety symptoms
- Intervention
- Lay health worker‐led psychosocial interventions
- Comparison
- usual care or no treatment
- Outcome
- Disease prevalence
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Lay health worker‐led psychosocial interventions vs usual or no care Disease prevalence · children/adolescents with post‐traumatic stress and related depressive/anxiety symptoms The review found no eligible studies for this question. Primary‐level worker interventions for the care of people living with mental disorders and distress in low‐… (2021) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | Not reported | No studies found |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary‐level worker interventions for the care of people living with mental disorders and distress in low‐ and middle‐income countries 2021 · 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.