ArticleBMJ open2026
School-based versus community-based interventions for promoting mental health among school-age children in marginalised or underserved populations: a systematic review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSchool-aged children frequently experience psychological distress due to academic pressures, a challenge that is often more severe for those from underserved and minority communities. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of mental health interventions implemented in school and community settings for children aged 5 to 19. It also seeks to compare the outcomes between children from minority and underserved populations and their peers. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review will follow Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to identify relevant studies. Major databases will be searched using a structured search strategy developed by the research team. The review will include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assess the impact of interventions conducted in school or community settings to prevent psychological distress-specifically depression, anxiety and stress. To minimise bias, two reviewers will independently select studies and extract data at various stages. The quality of included studies will be assessed. A meta-analysis will be conducted to compare intervention outcomes between children from underserved/minority communities and other children. Pooled prevalence rates and subgroup analyses will be used to explore differences in effectiveness. Heterogeneity among studies and publication bias will also be assessed. Meta-analyses of proportions, ORs and relative risks will be conducted using a random-effects model to estimate effect sizes from multivariate analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was not required, as this study involved secondary analysis of published literature and did not involve human participants. To date, no systematic review has comprehensively compared school-based and community-based interventions in terms of their effectiveness in addressing anxiety, depression and stress among school-aged children. This review aims to fill that gap by providing clinical insights into the comparative effectiveness of various intervention types and settings. PROSPERO REVIEW REGISTRATION: CRD42023479389.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.