[article]
Titre : |
Psychosocial interventions for disruptive behaviour problems in children in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
Type de document : |
Texte imprimé et/ou numérique |
Auteurs : |
Matthew D. BURKEY, Auteur ; Megan HOSEIN, Auteur ; Isabella MORTON, Auteur ; Marianna PURGATO, Auteur ; Ahmad ADI, Auteur ; Mark KURZROK, Auteur ; Brandon A. KOHRT, Auteur ; Wietse A. TOL, Auteur |
Article en page(s) : |
p.982-993 |
Langues : |
Anglais (eng) |
Mots-clés : |
Child behaviour disruptive behaviour disorders psychosocial interventions low-income countries meta-analysis |
Index. décimale : |
PER Périodiques |
Résumé : |
Background Most of the evidence for psychosocial interventions for disruptive behaviour problems comes from Western, high-income countries. The transferability of this evidence to culturally diverse, low-resource settings with few mental health specialists is unknown. Methods We conducted a systematic review with random-effects meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials examining the effects of psychosocial interventions on reducing behaviour problems among children (under 18) living in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Results Twenty-six randomized controlled trials (representing 28 psychosocial interventions), evaluating 4,441 subjects, met selection criteria. Fifteen (54%) prevention interventions targeted general or at-risk populations, whereas 13 (46%) treatment interventions targeted children selected for elevated behaviour problems. Most interventions were delivered in group settings (96%) and half (50%) were administered by non-specialist providers. The overall effect (standardized mean difference, SMD) of prevention studies was ?0.25 (95% confidence interval (CI): ?0.41 to ?0.09; I2: 78%) and of treatment studies was ?0.56 (95% CI: ?0.51 to ?0.24; I2: 74%). Subgroup analyses demonstrated effectiveness for child-focused (SMD: ?0.35; 95% CI: ?0.57 to ?0.14) and behavioural parenting interventions (SMD: ?0.43; 95% CI: ?0.66 to ?0.20), and that interventions were effective across age ranges. Conclusions Our meta-analysis supports the use of psychosocial interventions as a feasible and effective way to reduce disruptive behaviour problems among children in LMIC. Our study provides strong evidence for child-focused and behavioural parenting interventions, interventions across age ranges and interventions delivered in groups. Additional research is needed on training and supervision of non-specialists and on implementation of effective interventions in LMIC settings. |
En ligne : |
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12894 |
Permalink : |
https://www.cra-rhone-alpes.org/cid/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=368 |
in Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry > 59-9 (September 2018) . - p.982-993
[article] Psychosocial interventions for disruptive behaviour problems in children in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis [Texte imprimé et/ou numérique] / Matthew D. BURKEY, Auteur ; Megan HOSEIN, Auteur ; Isabella MORTON, Auteur ; Marianna PURGATO, Auteur ; Ahmad ADI, Auteur ; Mark KURZROK, Auteur ; Brandon A. KOHRT, Auteur ; Wietse A. TOL, Auteur . - p.982-993. Langues : Anglais ( eng) in Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry > 59-9 (September 2018) . - p.982-993
Mots-clés : |
Child behaviour disruptive behaviour disorders psychosocial interventions low-income countries meta-analysis |
Index. décimale : |
PER Périodiques |
Résumé : |
Background Most of the evidence for psychosocial interventions for disruptive behaviour problems comes from Western, high-income countries. The transferability of this evidence to culturally diverse, low-resource settings with few mental health specialists is unknown. Methods We conducted a systematic review with random-effects meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials examining the effects of psychosocial interventions on reducing behaviour problems among children (under 18) living in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Results Twenty-six randomized controlled trials (representing 28 psychosocial interventions), evaluating 4,441 subjects, met selection criteria. Fifteen (54%) prevention interventions targeted general or at-risk populations, whereas 13 (46%) treatment interventions targeted children selected for elevated behaviour problems. Most interventions were delivered in group settings (96%) and half (50%) were administered by non-specialist providers. The overall effect (standardized mean difference, SMD) of prevention studies was ?0.25 (95% confidence interval (CI): ?0.41 to ?0.09; I2: 78%) and of treatment studies was ?0.56 (95% CI: ?0.51 to ?0.24; I2: 74%). Subgroup analyses demonstrated effectiveness for child-focused (SMD: ?0.35; 95% CI: ?0.57 to ?0.14) and behavioural parenting interventions (SMD: ?0.43; 95% CI: ?0.66 to ?0.20), and that interventions were effective across age ranges. Conclusions Our meta-analysis supports the use of psychosocial interventions as a feasible and effective way to reduce disruptive behaviour problems among children in LMIC. Our study provides strong evidence for child-focused and behavioural parenting interventions, interventions across age ranges and interventions delivered in groups. Additional research is needed on training and supervision of non-specialists and on implementation of effective interventions in LMIC settings. |
En ligne : |
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12894 |
Permalink : |
https://www.cra-rhone-alpes.org/cid/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=368 |
|