Comparison 3: MBT‐A vs TAU or another comparator: Repetition of SH at post‐intervention
It is very uncertain whether comparison 3: MBT‐A changes repetition of SH at post‐intervention compared with TAU or another comparator (very low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Comparison 3: MBT‐A vs TAU or another comparator Repetition of SH at post‐intervention · self‐harm in children and adolescents (up to 18 years or age) It is very uncertain whether comparison 3: MBT‐A changes repetition of SH at post‐intervention compared with TAU or another comparator (very low certainty). Interventions for self‐harm in children and adolescents (2021) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | OR 0.7 [0.06, 8.46] | 2 studies · 85 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventions for self‐harm in children and adolescents 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
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.