Cochrane · systematic review · CD014300
Psychological and social interventions for the promotion of mental health in people living in low‐ and middle‐income countries affected by humanitarian crises
Papola, D, Prina, E, Ceccarelli, C, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2024 · Cochrane Library
Common Mental DisordersAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
12
current version
GRADE rated
8
No studies
4
Included studies
NR
No studies 4 · 33.3%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 6 · 50%Low 2 · 16.7%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Summary of findings table ‐ Psychosocial intervention compared to control for promoting the mental health of people living in LMICs affected by humanitarian crises (children)
Population: promoting the mental health of people living in LMICs affected by humanitarian crises (children)
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Mental well‐being at study endpoint Summary of findings table ‐ Psychosocial intervention vs control | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 3378 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
Mental well‐being at Summary of findings table ‐ Psychosocial intervention vs control | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 258 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Functioning at study endpoint Summary of findings table ‐ Psychosocial intervention vs control | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 183 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Functioning at Summary of findings table ‐ Psychosocial intervention vs control | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 183 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Prosocial behaviour at study endpoint Summary of findings table ‐ Psychosocial intervention vs control | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 1633 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Prosocial behaviour at Summary of findings table ‐ Psychosocial intervention vs control | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 483 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Summary of findings table ‐ Psychosocial intervention compared to control for promoting the mental health of people living in LMICs affected by humanitarian crises (adults)
Population: promoting the mental health of people living in LMICs affected by humanitarian crises (adults)
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Mental well‐being at study endpoint Summary of findings table ‐ Psychosocial intervention vs control | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 674 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Mental well‐being at Summary of findings table ‐ Psychosocial intervention vs control | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 441 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Functioning at study endpoint ‐ not measured Summary of findings table ‐ Psychosocial intervention vs control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Functioning at Summary of findings table ‐ Psychosocial intervention vs control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Prosocial behaviour at study endpoint ‐ not measured Summary of findings table ‐ Psychosocial intervention vs control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Prosocial behaviour at Summary of findings table ‐ Psychosocial intervention vs control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |