4.6 Review

Psychiatric disorders among people with cancer in low- and lower-middle-income countries: study protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal

BMJ OPEN
Volume 7, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017043

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. New South Wales Institute of Psychiatry (NSWIOP) Special Training Fellowship grant

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction Cancer is a rapidly growing public health problem in low- and lower-middle-income countries (LLMICs). There is evidence from upper-income countries that comorbid mental illness is common and can adversely impact cancer outcomes. Little is known about this burden in LLMICs. This systematic review has two aims. The first is to review the prevalence and patterns of psychiatric comorbidity in adults with cancer in LLMICs. The second is to review psychiatric treatment outcomes in this population. Methods and analysis The review will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. A systematic search of electronic databases (MEDLINE, PsycInfo, Embase and CINAHL) will be conducted. Studies will be included if they report the prevalence of psychiatric comorbidity, or if they evaluate psychiatric treatment outcomes, in adults with cancer living in LLMICs. The search will be limited to studies published in peer-reviewed journals between March 2002 and March 2017. The reference lists of included studies will be hand searched. Critical appraisal will be performed using Quality Assessment Tools from the National Institute of Health. Pooled prevalence meta-analysis is planned. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval is not required as no primary data will be collected. The results will be presented at conferences and published in a peerreviewed journal. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42017057103.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available